^36 


■ 

UC  so 

1 

0  ^3 

5 i 

1  — ^ 

2  =" 

1 

. ',_ 

English  Neutrality 
Is   the  Alabama  a  British  Pirate? 

GroEvenor  Porter  Lovwey 


^^/..'■^v  .^  ■ 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 

GIFT  OF 


■I  'M  '•in»tj*s 


ENGLISH  NEUTRALITY, 


IS  THE  ALABAMA  A  BRITISH  PIRATE? 


9 
\'\\  I  I.  A  l>i;[,  I'll  I  A  : 
HKNRY    M.   ASHMKAD,    IHMiK    AND   .1  f »  H    P  II I  N  T  R  R, 
Xos.   1102   AMI   1104  Sanhom  Stukkt. 


ENGLISH  NEUTRALITY. 


IS  THE  ALABAMA  A  BRITISH  PIRATE? 


IMIILADKMMIIA  : 

HENRY    15 .    ASH  M  K  AD,    15  0  0  1<     A  NMJ    J  (1  H    P  R  I  N  T  V.  R , 

1102  AND   1)01   Hanhom   Stkkkt. 

18G3. 


n"XL 


TO  ABIEL  A.  LOW,  ESQ. 


"When  Great  Britain  was  last  in  the  position  of  requiring  from  other 
nations  the  observance  of  a  strict  neutrality,  the  unjust  aspersion  was 
cast  upon  your  house  of  fitting  out  a  vessel  in  the  interest  of  her  enemy. 
The  searching  investigation — demanded  by  you — which  followed,  led  to 
your  complete  vindication,  and  an  indignant  declaration  by  the  merchants 
of  New  York  of  their  abhorrence  of  the  crime  against  honest  neutrality, 
which  had  been  so  falsely  laid  upon  American  merchants. 

Now,  when  England  is  called  upon  to  perform  the  duties  of  neutrality, 
you  become,  by  the  loss  of  your  ship,  the  Jacob  Bell,  a  principal  sufferer 
from  her  flagrant  disregard  of  international  justice  and  honor. 

These  special  circumstances  alone,  show  an  evident  propriety  in  inscrib- 
ing to  you  this  reading  of  law  and  history  upon  the  cases  of  those  public 
marauders,  the  Alabama  and  Florida.  But  other  considerations  unite  to 
prove  the  fitness  of  such  a  dedication  :  and  among  them  may  be  enumerated 
that  eminent  enterprise  which  has  made  your  name  the  synonym  of  honor 
in  the  four  quarters  of  the  globe  ;  your  unflinching  and  self-sacrificing 
patriotism  in  these  days  of  trial ;  your  public  and  intelligent  advocacy  of 
right  principles  and  right  practice  toward  other  nations  under  the  irri- 
tating and  embarrassing  circumstances  of  the  time ;  and,  above  all,  that 
universal  judgment  of  the  community  in  which  you  live,  by  which  is  con- 
ceded to  you  a  union  of  public  and  private  virtues  fully  entitling  you  to 
the  high  place  you  hold  in  men's  esteem. 

The  public  voice  will  cordially  endorse  the  truth  of  these  observations, 
and  admit  their  force  as  a  justification  for  joining  your  name  to  this  effort 
to  direct  pojmlar  attention  to  those  serious  complications,  now  arising 
from  the  course  of  conduct  towards  this  nation  which  Great  Britain  has 
chosen  to  adopt. 

"With  great  respect,  I  am 

Your  obedient  servant, 

GROSVENOK  P.  LOWREY. 

New  Yokk,  March  14,  18G3. 


554572 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Archive 

in  2008  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.archive.org/details/englislineutralitOOIowr 


ENGLISH   NEUTRALITY. 


During  the  past  twelve  months,  numerous  and  notorious  acts, 
in  breach  of  those  obligations  of  neutrality  which  are  due  from  a 
friendly  nation  to  another  engaged  in  war,  have  been  perpetrated 
against  us  by  the  British  government  and  people.  The  action  of 
our  government  touching  these  grave  matters,  has  been  forbear- 
ing, although  firm,  and  in  all  respects  admirable,  in  contrast  with 
the  action  and  language  of  England  herself  in  former  times,  under 
circumstances  differing  from  the  present  only  in  the  respect  that, 
from  the  character  of  this  war,  our  claim  to  the  observance  of 
strict  neutrality  is  stronger  than  hers  has,  or  could  ever  have 
been.  The  public  journals  of  England  announce  that,  far 
from  any  cessation  of  this  evil  industry,  the  arming  and 
equipping  of  vessels  to  cruise  against  our  commerce  is  going 
on  with  increased  energy,  and  with  such  lack  of  disguise,  that 
we  are  forced  to  consider  the  councils  of  that  country  as  want- 
ing in  capacity  or  good  faith.  But  little  knowledge  of  inter- 
national history  is  requisite  to  decide  upon  which  horn  of  the 
dilemma  to  locate  the  probability. 

Under  such  a  state  of  facts,  it  is  time  that  the  people  at 
large  were  led  to  consider,  in  the  light  of  history  and  law,  the 
exact  character  and  limitation  of  their  rights  in  such  cases. 

That  code  which,  under  the  general  name  of  the  Law  of 
Nations,  is  admitted  to  control  the  conduct  of  states  toward 
each  other,  ought  to  be,  and,  as  defined  by  the  publicists,  is 
founded  ujjon  the  most  elevated  considerations  of  morals,  jus- 
tice, equity,  and  convenience.  In  this  dignified  system,  under 
which  nations  act  in  view  of  all  the  Avorld,  it  is  the  substance, 
rather  than  the  form  of  things,  which  is  regarded;  and  those 
small  techniciilities  which,  in  municipal  systems,  often  impede 
the  course  of  justice,  arc  rightly  disregarded. 

The  relation  of  neutrality  which  arises  under  the  law  of  na- 
tions is  declared  by  Philliuiorc,  the  latest  and  best  English  writer 


b  ENGLISH    NEUTRALITY. 

upon  international  law,  to  consist  in  two  principal  circum- 
stancos: 

1.  Entire  abstinence  from  any  participation  in  the  war. 

2.  Impartiality  of  conduct  towards  both  belligerents. 
These   obligations  are   frequently  strengthened,    and   made 

obligatory  upon  all  persons  resident  within  the  territorial  juris- 
diction of  a  nation,  hj,  first,  treaties;  and,  second,  enactments 
of  the  local  legislature,  or  whatever,  in  each  case,  corresponds 
to  such  a  body.  As  between  thip  nation  and  Great  Britain, 
the  right  and  duty  of  neutrality  rest  upon  international  law 
and  the  statutes  of  the  respective  countries.  We  have,  on  our 
part,  endeavored  to  provide  for  the  prevention  or  punishment 
of  unneutral  acts,  by  either  citizens  or  strangers,  while  among 
us,  through  acts  of  Congress  of  1794,  1818,  and  1838.  Great 
Britain  has  undertaken  to  accomplish  the  same  end  by  act  of 
Parliament,  59  Geo.  III.,  c.  69.*     A  review  of  the  action  and 

*  The  following  are  extracts  from  the  act  of  59  Geo.  III.,  commonly  called  the 
Foreign  Enlistment  Act: 

'•  Skc.  7.  And  beit  further  enacted, that  if  any  person  within  any  part  of  the  United 
Kingdom,  or  in  any  part  of  his  majesty's  dominions  beyond  the  seas,  shall,  without  the 
leave  and  license  of  his  majesty,  for  that  purpose  first  had  and  obtained,  as  aforesaid, 
equip,  furnisli.  fit  out,  or  arm,  or  procure  to  be  equipped,  furnished,  fitted  out,  or  armed, 
orshall  knowingly  aid,  assist,  orbe  concerned  in  tlie  equipping,  furnishing,  fitting  out, 
or  arming  of  any  ship  or  vessel,  with  intent,  or  in  order  tli  at  such  ship  or  vessel  shall  be 
employed  in  the  service  of  any  foreign  prince,  state,  or  potentate,  or  of  any  foreign 
colony,  province,  orjiart  of  any  province,  orpeople,  orof  any  persiin  or  persons,  exercis- 
ing or  assuming  to  exercise  any  powers  of  government  in  or  over  any  foreign  state, 
colony,  province,  or  part  of  any  jjrovince,  or  people,  as  a  transpori,  or  storeship,  or 
with  intent  to  cruise  or  commit  hostilities  against  any  prince,  stale,  or  potentate,  or 
against  the  subjects  or  citizens  of  any  prince,  state,  or  potentate,  or  against  the  per- 
sons exercising  or  assuming  to  exercise  the  powers  of  government  in  any  colony, 
province,  or  part  of  any  yirovince,  or  country,  or  against  the  inhabitants  of  any  foreign 
colony,  province,  or  part  of  any  province  or  country  with  whom  his  majesty  shall 
not  then  be  at  war ;  or  shall  within  the  United  KingJ(jm  or  any  of  his  majesty's 
domini(ms,  or  in  any  settlement,  colony,  territory,  island,  or  place  belonging  or  sub- 
ject to  his  majesiy,  issue  or  deliver  any  commission  for  any  ship  or  vessel,  to  the  in- 
tent that  such  ship  or  vessel  shall  be  employed  as  aforesaid;  every  such  person  so 
offending  shall  lie  deemed  guilty  of  misdemeanor,  and  shall,  upon  c(mviclion  there- 
of, upon  liny  information  or  inilictment,  be  punished  by  fine  and  imprisonment,  or 
either  of  them,  at  ihe  di.-cretion  of  the  court  in  which  such  oflender  shall  be  convict- 
ed ;  and  every  such  ship  or  vessel,  with  the  tackle,  apparel,  and  furniture,  together 
with  all  the  materials,  arms,  ammunition,  and  stores,  which  may  belong  to  or  be  on 
board  of  any  such  ship  or  vessel,  shall  be  forfeited;  and  it  shall  be  lawful  for  any 
officer  of  his  majesty's  cuxtoms  or  excise,  or  any  otiicer  of  his  majesty's  navy,  who- 
is  by  law  empowered  to  make  seizures  for  any  forfeiture  incurred  under  any  of  the 
laws  of  customs  or  excise,  or  the  laws  of  trade  pr  navigation,  to  seize  such  ships  and 
vessels  as  aforesaid,  and  in  such  places  and  in  such  manner  in  which  the  officers  of 
his  majesty's  customs  or  excise  and  the  officers  of  his  majesty's  navy  arc  empowered 
re8|icctively  to  make  seizures  under  the  laws  of  customs  and  excise,  or  under  the 
law.s  of  trade  and  navigation;  and  that  every  such  ship  and  vessel  with  the  tackle, 
apparel,  and  furniture,  together  with  all  the  materials,  arms,  ammunition,  and  stores, 
which  may  belong  to  or  be  on  board  of  such  ship  or  vessel,  may  be  prosecuted  and  con- 
demned in  the  like  manner,  and  in  such  courts  as  ships  or  vessels  may  be  prosecuted 
and  condemned  for  any  breach  of  the  laws  made  for  the  protection  of  the  revenues, 
customs,  and  excise,  or  of  the  laws  of  trade  and  navigation. 

"Skc.  8.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  that  if  any  person  in  any  part  of  the  United 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE  T  I 

demands  of  each  government,  in  cases  of  infraction  of  neutral 
rights  in  times  past,  will  be  important,  for  the  purpose  of  as- 
certaining what,  precisely,  is  the  law  of  nations  upon  this  point ; 
but  that  must  be  postponed  for  a  statement  of  some  of  the  facts 
of  which  we  now  complain. 

Upon  the  breaking  out  of  the  rebellion,  the  British  govern- 
ment made  haste  to  concede  belligerent  rights  to  the  insur- 
gents, and  to  declare  its  intention  to  observe  strict  neutrality. 
The  state  of  English  law  was  such  that  this  proclamation  was 
entirely  uncalled  for,  as  it  could  neither  increase  nor  decrease 
legal  obligations  or  penalties  ;  and  its  only  effect  was  to  guar- 
antee to  adventurers,  who  might  wish  to  enlist  with  the  re- 
bellion, that  they  should  thereby  undergo  no  greater  risks 
than  the  ordinary  chances  of  regular  war.  The  promulgation 
of  the  first  proposition  was  generally  taken  to  be,  and  perhaps 
was,  intended  to  relieve  such  persons  from  the  character  and 
ugly  responsibility  of  pirates  and  freebooters.  It  became,  in 
fact,  an  invitation,  as  it  did  not,  on  the  other  hand,  enjoin 
vigilance  upon  officials  or  threaten  punishment  to  offenders. 
Under  this  encouragement,  the  business  of  ship-building  for  the 
South  commenced,  and  went  on  with  a  rapidity  which  was 
surprising  to  those  who  had  forgotten  that  Manchester  and 
Sheffield  furnished  supplies  to  maintain  the  Sepoy  rebellion. 
The  two  principal  cases  are  those  of  the  war-steamers  Oreto 
and  Alabama.  In  February,  1862,  it  was  notorious  at  Liver- 
pool that  the  Oreto  (now  called  the  Florida),  a  newly-launched 
war-steamer,  was  intended  for  the  Confederate  service ;  and 
the  American  Minister,  Mr.  Adams,  wrote  to  Lord  Russell 
(Diplomatic  Correspondence  for  1802),  notifying  him  of  the 

Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  or  in  anj'  part  of  his  mnjcsty's  dominions 
beyond  the  seas,  without  the  leave  and  licen.se  of  his  majesty  lor  that  purpese  first 
had  and  obtained,  as  aforesaid,  shall,  hy  nddin;;  to  the  number  of  the  guns  of  such 
Tcssel,  or  hy  ehan>;in;;  those  on  board  for  other  guns,  or  by  the  addition  of  any 
equipment  for  war,  increa.-e  or  augment,  or  procure  to  lie  increased  or  augmented, 
or  eiiall  ho  knowingly  concerned  in  increasing  or  augmenting  the  warliUe  force  of 
any  ship  or  vessel  of  war,  or  cruiser,  or  other  armed  vessel,  which,  at  the  time  of 
hor  arrival  in  any  part  of  the  United  Kingdc)m,  or  any  of  his  majesty's  dominions 
wa«  a  nhip-of  war,  cruiser,  or  armed  vessel  in  the  service  of  any  foreign  prince, 
gtato,  or  jiotcntale,  or  of  any  person  or  persons  exeri;i.sing  or  assuming  to  oxcicise  any 
powers  of  government  in,  or  over  any  colotiy,  province,  or  part  of  any  province,  or 
people,  belonging  to  the  subjects  of  any  such  prince,  state,  or  potentate,  or  to  the 
inhabitants  of  any  colony,  province,  or  jiart  of  any  province,  or  country,  under  the 
oontrol  of  any  person  or  jiersons  so  exercising  or  assuming  to  exercise  the  jiowersof 
govern  merit ;  every  such  person  soollending  shall  be  (brcmcd  ijuilty  of  a  nii.Mlcnicanor, 
and  shall,  ufion  being  convicted  thereof,  u[ion  any  information  or  inilidnicnt,  bo 
punished  by  line  or  imprisonment,  or  either  of  them,  at  the  discretion  of  the  court 
before  which  such  oficnder  shall  bo  convicted." 


8  ENGLISH   NEUTRALITY. 

character  of  the  vessel ;  upon  which  the  customs  officer  of  that 
port  was  directed  to  investigate  the  matter.  This  zealous  offi- 
cial proceeded  to  make  inquiries  of  the  builders,  who  informed 
him  that  the  vessel  was  owned  by  Fawcett,  Preston  &  Co.,  of 
Liverpool,  and  that  they  (the  builders)  believed  she  was  des- 
tined for  Palermo — stating,  as  the  ground  of  this  belief,  that 
"they  had  been  requested  to  name  a  master  to  take  her  to  that 
port."  No  inquiry  appears  to  have  been  made  of-the  owners 
or  other  persons,  and  the  collector  reported  that  the  Oretowas, 
without  doubt,  bound  on  a  legitimate  voyage.  Upon  further 
representations  by  Mr.  Adams,  an  examination  was  made  of 
her,  when  her  crew  was  found  to  consist  of  fifty-two  English- 
men and  one  American,  and  her  cargo  of  one  hundred  and 
seventy-three  tons  of  arms,  for  Palermo  and  Jamaica.  These 
suspicious  circumstances,  together  with  the  universal  public 
rumor  as  to  her  real  destination,  were  disregarded,  and  she  was 
permitted  to  sail.  Her  first  port  was  Nassau,  in  New  Provi- 
dence, a  British  colonial  port.  At  this  place  her  real  character 
was  well  known  and  no  longer  denied.  Upon  demand  of  the 
American  consul,  some  sham  proceedings  were  taken  against 
her  by  the  English  local  authorities,  but  she  was  detained  only 
long  enough  for  her  new  commander  to  reach  her,  and  then 
allowed  to  continue  her  piratical  voyage.  Her  career  since 
that  time  is  fresh  in  the  memory  of  every  man,  and  need  not 
be  recapitulated.  Her  latest  exploit  is  the  burning  of  the  ship 
Jacob  Bell.     Mr.  Adams  writes  (March  7,  Dip.  Cor.  1862:) 

"  The  nominal  destination  of  the  Oreto  for  Sicily  is  the  only  advantage 
which  appears  to  have  been  derived  from  my  attempt  to  procure  the  inter- 
ference of  the  government  to  stop  her  departure." 

The  only  apology  for  such  dereliction  was,  "  a  polite  expres- 
sion" by  Lord  Russell  "  of  regret;"  but  "  he  did  not  see  how 
her  majesty's  government  could  change  its  position."  (Mr. 
Adams  "to  Mr.  Seward,  April  16,  1862.) 

In  the  next  case,  that  of  the  Alabama,  this  excuse  (bad  in 
itself),  that  the  American  minister  did  not  furnish  sufficient 
proof  to  justify  interference  by  the  government,  is  wholly  want- 
ing. On  the  23d  of  June,  1862,  Mr.  Adams  wrote  to  Lord 
Russell,  informing  him  that  the  Oreto  had  gone  to  Nassau,  and 
that  another  and  more  formidable  war-steamer  was  nearly 
ready  to  follow  her.     Said  he  : 


IS    THE   ALABAMA   A    BRITISH   PIRATE  f  d 

"This  vessel  has  been  built  and  launched  from  the  dockyard  of  persons, 
one  of  whom  is  now  sitting  as  a  member  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  ia 
fitting  out  for  the  especial  and  manifest  purpose  of  carrying  on  hostilities 
at  sea.  It  is  about  to  be  commanded  by  one  of  the  insurgent  agents,  the 
same  who  sailed  in  the  Oreto.  The  parties  engaged  in  the  enterprise  are 
persons  well  known  at  Liverpool  to  be  agents  and  officers  of  the  insurgents 
in  the  United  States,  the  nature  and  extent  of  whose  labors  are  well  ex- 
plained in  the  copy  of  an  intercepted  letter,  which  I  received  from  my 
government,  and  had  the  honor  to  place  in  your  lordship's  hands  a  few 
days  ago."     (Diplom.  Corr.  128.) 

On  the  25th,  Lord  Russell  replied,  stating  that  he  had,  with- 
out loss  of  time,  referred  the  matter  to  the  proper  department. 
On  the  1st  of  July,  the  persons  to  whom  the  matter  was  thus 
referred  reported  that  the  fitting  out  of  this  vessel  had  not  es- 
caped the  attention  of  her  majesty's  revenue  officers,  and  that, 
pursuant  to  directions,  they  had  made  inquiries  of  the  builders, 
who  did  not  deny  that  she  is  built  for  a  foreign  government, 
but  "  do  not  appear  disposed,  to  answer  any  questions  as  to  her 
destination  when  she  leaves  Liverpool."  The  government  are 
not  shown  to  have  taken  any  offence  at  this  trifling,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  declined  to  interfere  until  further  proof  should  be 
presented.  This  demand  was  not  difficult  to  be  complied  with, 
for  within  a  few  days  affidavits  were  produced  to  the  Board  of 
Customs,  upon  which  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Collier,  an  eminent 
English  lawyer,  was  first  taken,  who  replied : 

"  It  appears  difficult  to  make  out  a  stronger  case  of  infringement  of  the 
Foreign  Enlistment  Act,  which,  if  not  enforced  on  this  occasion,  is  little 
better  than  a  dead  letter."     (Diplom.  Corr.  152.) 

A  further  delay  was  caused  by  the  rejection  of  these  affida- 
vits on  account  of  some  technical  defect  in  form  ;  but  at  last 
every  captious  objection  being  exhausted,  copies  of  the  per- 
fected affidavits  were,  on  the  23d  of  July,  sent  to  Lord  Rus- 
sell ;  but  no  action  being  taken,  the  Alabama  went  to  sea  at 
her  leisure  on  the  29th.  The  flagrant  delinquency  of  the 
government  is  admitted  by  Lord  Russell  on  the  Slst,  in  a  con- 
versation with  Mr.  Adams,  at  which  time  he  stated  that  the 
delay  of  the  governuient  "  had  heen  caused  by  the  development 
of  a  sudden  malady  in  Sir  John  D.  Harding^  the  queens  ad- 
vocate^ totally  iricapacitadny  him  fur  the  transaction  of  htisinesa. 
This  made  it  necessary  to  call  in  other  parties,  whose  opinion 
had  at  last  been  for  a  detention  of  the  gunboat,  but  before  the 


10  ENGLISn    NEUTRALITY. 

order  got  down  to  Liverpool  she  was  gone."  It  is  not  pretended 
that  any  expedition  was  used  by  the  parties  who  came  to  the 
rescue  of  the  government  when  Sir  John  D.  Harding's  "  ma- 
lady "  assumed  international  importance,  or  that  any  attempt 
was  made  to  delay  the  gunboat  temporarily,  until  a  decision 
could  be  arrived  at ;  or  that  the  telegraph  or  any  extra-expedi- 
tious means  of  communication  with  Liverpool  was  made  use  of 
when  this  decision  was  "at  last"  obtained,* 

It  should  be  stated,  in  justice  to  Earl  Russell,  however,  that 
he  declared  his  intention  to  send  to  Nassau  to  have  the  vessel 
intercepted ;  but  in  that  connection  let  it  also  be  remembered 
that  he  did  not  send ;  or  at  least  that  he  did  not  send  to  the 
British  squadron  to  seize  her  elsewhere  in  that  neighborhood, 
and  that  the  Alabama  has  avoided  that  point  with  as  much 
shrewdness  as  if  her  captain  were  possessed  in  advance  of  the  in- 
tention of  the  British  cabinet ;  that,  although  she  has  been 
cruising  in  British  West  Indian  waters  for  months,  and  has 
been  for  six  days  of  the  latter  portion  of  the  time  lying  in  the 
British  port  of  Kingston,  to  be  refitted,  no  attempt  has  been  made 
to  seiz.e  or  detain  her,  and  that  no  prosecutions  have  been  in- 
stituted against  any  of  the  many  parties  in  England  who  in- 
fringed the  Foreign  Enlistment  Act  and  the  law  of  nations,  by 
conniving  at  her  escape  and  perfecting  her  armament  afterwards 
in  Terceira.f 

*  It  may  be  remarked  in  passing,  as  a  fair  illustration  of  the  fact,  that  a  c-hange 
in  Lord  Russell's  stand  point  of  observation  sometimes  affects  a  change  in  his  views 
of  a  suliject ;  that  while  Great  Britain  was  thus  violating  every  legal,  moral,  and 
honorable  obligation  to  us,  she  was  insisting  with  pertinacity  and  almost  iinperious- 
ness  against  those  wholesome  restrictions  on  trade  betwe^'n  New  York  and  Nassau, 
which  the  collector  of  this  port  foui  d  it  necessary  to  adopt  in  order  to  prevent  the 
sending  of  supplies  to  the  rebels  (Dip.  Cor.,  145,  304),  and  that  the  inadvertent  act 
of  a  prize-master,  the  ludicrous  character  of  which  the  following  note  will  explain, 
was  miignified  into  an  insult  to  the  English  nation,  tit  to  become  a  subject  for  diplo- 
matic Correspondence  (Dip.  Cor.  244). 

"  New  York,  Jan.  3,  1862. 
"  Sir: — I  received  your  order  to-day,  stating  for  me  to  make  a  written  statement 
"and  explain  the  reason  for  hoisting  the  English  flag  under  the  AmericaJi  C'ommo- 
"  dore  ;  not  being  acquainted  with  the  custom  of  bringing  in  prizes,  I  was  under  the 
"impression  that  I  was  right.  My  intention  was  to  do  right,  but  it  was  not  done 
"for  any  bad  purpose  or  intention  to  insult  the  English  flag  in  any  way  whatever. 
"  I  was  wrong  for  so  doing,  and  truly  hope  the  department  will  forgive  me. 

"JOHN  BAKER, 
"  Commodore  Pauldiso."  "  Acting  Jlaster,  U.  S.  N. 

It  appears  by  a  letter  from  Commodore  W'ilkes  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  (Dip. 
Cor.,  p.  229),  that  the  British  gunboat  Bull  Dog  knowingly  gave  passage  to  rebel 
naval  officers,  on  their  way  to  England  to  take  charge  of  the  Alabama  and  other 
vessels  of  her  character. 

t  A.s  these  sheets  are  going  to  press,  I  have  received,  through  the  courtesy  of  Mr. 
Grant,  librari»in  of  the  Mercantile  Library,  a  pamphlet  just  published  in  London,  en- 
titled, "The  Alabama,"  from  wliich  the  following  extract  is  made: 

"  The  '  2yo/  aa  she  was  then  called,  sailed,  as  we  have  seen,  from  Liverpool  on  the 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  11 

Having  seen  by  this  statement  what  the  British  government 
failed  to  do,  let  us  inquire  what  it  ought  to  have  done. 
And  since  this  country  and  England  are  bound  to  each  other 

29th  of  July,  without  register  or  clearance,  under  the  command  of  Butcher,  an  En- 
glish subject,  who  had  been  referred  to  in  the  depositioij.  of  Passmore.  She  picked 
up  an  additional  fifty  men  ofiF  Point  Lynass,  and  proceeded  to  Terceira  in  the  Azores, 
where  she  anchored  in  the  Portuguese  waters ;  there  she  was  shortly  joined  by  a 
barque,  the  '  Agrippina,"  which  had  sailed  from  the  Thames  with  the  greater  portion 
of  the  privateer's  guns  and  stores  on  board.  The  barijue  discharired  her  cargo  into 
the  '  290,' which  was  still  flying  the  British  ensign,  and  when  the  Portuguese  au- 
thorities interposed,  the  person  Butcher,  it  is  alleged,  represented  his  vessel  to  be 
English,  aiding  the  English  barque,  which  he  said  was  sinking.  Another  vessel 
shortly  arrived  from  Liverpool,  the  steamer  'Bahama'  (which  was  at  tirst  believed 
to  be  the  U.  S.  steamer,  '  Tuscarora,'  causinic  some  commotion  on  board),  conveying 
the  confederate  offiter  Captain  Semmes,  with  Bullock,  and  flftj'  additional  men.  and 
stores  for  the  privateer.  The  Portuguese  authorities  then  ordered  all  three  vessels 
off,  but  they  merely  went  to  a  .«ecluded  part  of  the  coast,  and  completed  the  tran- 
shipment of  the  stores.  The  '  Bahama'  cleared  from  Liverpool  on  the  twelfth  of 
August,  having  on  board  nineteen  eases  eoutainiug  guns,  gun-carriages,  shot,  ram- 
mers, Ac,  shipped  by  a  firm  of  engineers  and  ironfounders  of  Liverpool.  These 
cases  were  professedly  shipped  for  Nassau.  After  the  transfer  of  the  cargo  had 
been  concluded  Semmes  toijk  command,  ran  up  the  Confederate  flag  to  the  mast- 
head, and  christened  the  new  steamer  the  '  Alabama.'  He  read  to  the  crew  his 
commission  from  Jefferson  Davis,  as  eaptain,  and  then  made  a  sjjeech,  in  which  he 
explained  the  kind  of  warfare  he  proposed  to  wage,  and  called  for  volunteers.  One 
hundred  and  ten  of  those  on  board  consented,  and  forty  refused,  returning  in  the 
'  Bahama'  to  Liverpool.  Of  those  who  remained,  it  is  stated,  in  a  recently  published 
letter  from  a  Mr.  Underbill,  dated  St.  Thomas,  West  Indies,  and  which  professes  to 
give  a  narrative  taken  down  from  the  li|)S  of  the  boatswain  of  the  '  Alabama,'  during 
her  passage  from  Liverpool  to  the  Azores,  that  the  most  part  belonged  to  the  En- 
glish >i'aval  Reserve,  all  trained  gunners,  and  that  the  crew  receive  from  the  Con- 
federate government  half  the  value  of  every  American  ship  and  cargo  destroyed. 
The  '  Bahama'  took  out  gold  to  pay  the  crew,  and  after  transferring  her  cargo 
returned  with  the  barque  to  England,  while  the  privateer  set  out  on  its  mission  of 
destruction." 

The  general  had  faith,  or,  at  the  very  least,  criminal  apathy  of  the  British  govern- 
ment in  thi.s  matter,  was  so  great  as  to  draw  from  Mr,  Adams  this  indignant  declara- 
tion (Letter  to  Mr.  Seward,  Dip.  Cor.  219);  ••  Ii  is  very  manifest  that  m  disposi- 
tion exists  here  to  apply  the  powers  of  the  government  to  the  investigation  of  the 
acts  complained  of,  flagrant  as  they  are,  or  to  the  prosecution  of  ofl'enders."  Upon 
the  part  of  Lord  Rus.-ell,  the  correspondence  is  e.xecedingly  ingenious  in  devising 
reasons  for  postpuuing  the  cimsideration  of,  or  refusing  to  grant  the  demands  of  the 
American  Minister.  On  the  4th  of  Sep.  (L*ip.  Cor.  200)  Mr.  A<lams,  in  writing  to 
Lord  Ku.-sell  on  the  subject  of  the  escape  of  the  Alabama,  July  29,  was  compelled 
to  comfiiain  thus:  "I  have  nut  yet  received  any  reply  in  writing  to  my  several  notes 
and  representations  I  have  had  the  honor  to  submit  to  her  majesty's  government 
touching  ihi;»  flagrant  case."  The  answer  to  this  was  at  last  received  on  the  22d, 
and  consisted  ol  e.xcuses,  amrmg  which  Sir  .Jnhn  D.  Hariiing's  '"malaily"  dues  not 
appear.  One  may  benevolently  hope  that  Sir  John  D.  Harding  was  able  to  forget 
it  a.1  easily  as  Lord  Jidin  Russell.  Let  the  reader  contrast  the  churli^h  tcmi)er  of 
the  folh/wiiig  letter,  which  is  a  fair  .'■peciinen  of  Lord  Russell's  style,  with  the  earn- 
est, open,  and  liberal  lauguuge  of  this  government,  as  it  will  be   hereinafter  shown. 

"  FoRp.ioN  Ohfice,  Oct.  16,  1862. 
"  Sir  : — I  have  the  honor  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your  leiif  r  ol'  ilie  l»(li  iii.it ,  envlo.sing 
a  copy  iif  an  inlcic<-pie<|  lell  r  wiiicli  you  had  received  from  the  United  Slates  ^civerumcnt,  he- 
ing  the  furllior  eviiJ-iice  with  n-jjard  to  llio  gau-l)i>al  'liHO;'  ....  and  wiili  rcfeicuce  to 
your  obicrvall.inH  witli  regard  to  tlie  iufringDim-ul  of  the  Foreign  EuHhtmciil  Act,  I  liavo  to  re- 
mark, that  it  it  true  that  the  Foreign  Eiili-iinent  Act,  or  any  other  act  for  thexanin  pinpoHe, 
can  be  cv  deil  by  very  Hulitle  contrlvancen ;  but  her  MiajeHty'H  government  cannot  on  that  ac- 
count go  beyond  the  Iftter  of  Ihe  exinling  law."     (Dip.  Cor  'lU  ) 

Perhn|in  Lord  KuhhcII  means  that  to  deride  in  time  is  to  go  beyond  the  /eltnr  of 
the  law;  for  it  is  of  the  fiiliire  to  do  that  that  Mr.  Adams  complain.'*.  The  decision, 
an  it  WHS  "at  last"  given,  wa.n  entirely  satisfactory,  and  had  it  liecn  iiia<le  known 
be/ore  in.-tcad  of  n/ier  the  departure  of  the  "  2'.»0,"  the  "  letter"  of  the  l.i  w,  in  Lord 
Rafsell  un'lcrstands  it,  might  have  been  a  little  shattered,  but  thoijjirit  of  the  law, 
which  now  lies  wickedly  violated,  would  have  been  preserved. 


12  ENGLISH    NEUTRALITY. 

in  mutual  obligations  of  neutrality,  arising  from  the  same 
crcneral  law  of  nations,  and  from  legislative  enactments  almost 
entirely  similar,  it  is  fair  to  show,  first,  how  we  conducted  our- 
selves toward  her  at  a  time  when  our  present  positions  were 
reversed. 

America  had  scarcely  taken  upon  herself  the  habitudes  of 
a  nation  before  she  was  called  to  perform  her  international 
obligations  of  neutrality.  The  circumstances  involved  great 
embarrassment.  One  belligerent  was  our  friend,  benefactor, 
and  sister  republic,  France;  the  other  was  our  enemy  and 
late  tyrant,  England.  We  were  weak  and  but  poorly  pre- 
pared to  resist  the  importunities  of  our  friend,  to  whom  we 
owed  so  large  a  debt  of  gratitude.  We  were  also  entangled 
by  treaty  stipulations  with  her,  under  which  she  enjoyed 
certain  privileges  in  our  waters  to  the  exclusion  of  England ; 
and  this  again,  together  with  a  strong  public  sympathy  for 
her,  caused  President  Washington  and  his  advisers  great 
diflBculty  in  securing  for  England  an  impartial  observance  of 
neutrality  in  the  matters  not  touched  by  the  treaty. 

Yet,  notwithstanding  all  this.  President  Washington,  in  the 
inaugural  speech  of  his  second  term,  proceeded  to  declare  a 
strict  rule  of  neutrality,  under  the  law  of  nations,  which  has 
been  faithfully  observed  to  this  day.  (Speech  to  Congress, 
American  State  Papers.  Foreign  Relations,  vol.  1.  p.  21.) 
On  the  22d  of  April,  1793,  he  issued  his  proclamation  con- 
taining these  words : 

"  I  have  given  instrucAions  to  those  officers  to  whom  it  belongs,  to  cause 
prosecutions  to  he  instituted  against  all  persons  who  shall,  within  the  cog- 
nizance of  the  courts  of  the  United  States,  violate  the  law  of  nations  [we 
had  no  statute  at  that  time]  with  respect  to  the  powers  at  war,  or  any  of 
them."     (Ibid.,  140.) 

This  was  followed  by  written  instructions  from  Alexander 
Hamilton,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  to  the  collectors  of  the 
customs,  requiring  "  the  greatest  vigilance,  care,  activity,  and 
impartiality,"  in  searching  for  and  discovering  any  attempt  to 
fit  out  vessels  and  expeditions,  or  send  men,  to  the  aid  of 
either  party  (ibid.  140) ;  and  so  strict  were  these  requirements 
that  Thomas  Jefferson,  Secretary  of  State,  the  great  champion 
of  neutrality,  was  compelled  to  denounce  them  as  "  setting  up 
a  system  of  espionage  destructive  to  the  peace  of  society." 
(Jeff.  Works,  vol.  9,  556 ;  8  ib.  556.)     While  Mr.  Jefferson 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  13 

declared  in  Cabinet  Council  (9  Jeflf.  W.  154),  "  It  is  incon- 
sistent for  a  nation  -which  has  be§n  patiently  bearing  for  ten 
years  the  grossest  insults  and  injuries  from  their  late  enemies, 
to  rise  at  a  feather  against  their  friends  and  benefactors ;  and 
at  a  moment,  too,  -when  circumstances  have  kindled  the  most 
ardent  affections  of  the  two  people  towards  each  other;" 
he  still  wrote  to  the  French  representative,  M.  Ternant,  de- 
manding the  cessation  of  the  fitting  out  of  certain  privateers  ^ 
in  Charleston  (3  Jeff.  561) ;  and  to  his  successor,  Citizen 
Genet  (whom  we  afterwards  sent  home  for  endeavoring  to  make 
use  of  our  harbors  for  such  illegal  purposes),  "  The  fitting 
out  of  armed  vessels  against  nations  with  whom  we  are  at 
peace"  is  "instrumental  to  the  annoyance  of  those  nations, 
and  thereby  tends  to  compromit  their  peace,"  and  "it  is  the  I 

duty  of  a  neutral  nation  to  prohibit  such  acts  as  would  injure  / 

one  of  the  warring  parties."     (Ibid.  571.) 

One  of  the  first  cases  demanding  action  by  the  government 
was  that  of  tlie  Little  Sarah.  Upon  the  suggestion  by  Mr. 
Hammond,  the  British  representative,  that  she  was  being  fitted 
as  a  French  privateer,  she  was  seized,  and  being  found  to  con- 
tain a  suspicious  armament,  was  prevented  from  sailing.  About 
the  same  time  the  British  ship  Grange  was  taken  in  American 
waters  by  the  French  war  vessel  L'Embuscade.  The  act  was 
considered  a  breach  of  our  sovereignty,  and  the  prize  seized 
and  restored  to  her  British  owners.  Numerous  prizes  were, 
on  proof  that  the  capturing  vessels  had  been  fitted  out  in  the 
United  States,  restored  to  their  owners.  The  government  did 
not  wait  for  action  by  the  British  representative,  but  held  its 
own  officers  to  the  duty  of  vigilance.  The  governors  of  the 
States  were  frequently  called  upon  to  arrest  vessels  about  de- 
parting (Hamilton's  W.,  vol.  2,  463).  In  one  case  we  find 
this  language  used: 

"  Tlio  case  in  quostion  is  that  of  a  vessel  armed,  equipped  and  manned 
in  a  port  of  the  L' iiitr-d  .States,  for  tlie  purpose  of  committin};;  hostilities  on 
a  nation  at  peace  with  us. 

"A-t  soon  as  it  iras  jxTccivi'd  that  .such  rnti'vpriai's  wonld  be  atlemjdrd,  • 

orders  to  prevent  tliem  uere  d'H/tatc/ied  to  all  the  States  and  ports  of  the 
Union.  In  eonsequcnce  of  tiicse  the  governor  of  New  York,  receiving 
information  that  a  HJoop  heretofore  called  the  F(dly,  now  the  Uopuhlican, 
was  fitting,  arming  and  manning,  to  cruise  against  a  natidn  with  wliom 
we  were  at  peace,  heized  the  vessel." 

Tlie  President  being  :ipj»rizcd,  ordered  her  iind  the  persons 


14  ENGLISH    NEUTRALITY. 

engaged  to  be  delivered  over  to  the  tribunals  for  punishment. 
(3  Jeff.  W.  386.)  Such  seizures  were  frequently  made,  the 
government  entering  into  it  as  a  matter  of  honor,  not  appear- 
ing to  suppose  that  its  duty  would  be  performed  by  sitting 
coldly  by  until  the  British  minister,  under  all  the  embarrass- 
ments of  being  a  stranger,  should  produce  irrefragable  proof 
of  infractions  of  its  own  laws.  Gen.  Washington  seems  to 
have  considered  it  a  shameful  and  humiliating  excuse  for  a 
government  to  plead  that  it  "  is  ignorant  of  what  is  carried 
on  daily  and  repeatedly  in  its  own  country."  It  was  im- 
possible, however,  with  our  limited  navy,  to  prevent  entirely 
such  expeditions,  and  at  last,  at  the  risk  of  a  war  with  our 
friend,  it  was  resolved  in  Cabinet  Council,  on  the  15th  of 
August,  1793,  "  That  the  Minister  of  the  French  Republic  be 
informed  that  the  President  considers  the  United  States  as 
bound  by  positive  assurances  given  in  conformity  to  the  laws 
of  neutrality,  to  effectuate  the  restoration  of,  or  make  compen- 
sation for,  prizes  which  shall  have  been  made  of  any  of  the 
parties  at  war  with  France,  subsequent  to  the  5th  day  of  June 
last,  by  privateers  fitted  out  in  their  ports.  That  it  is  conse- 
quently expected  that  he  will  cause  restitution  to  be  made  of  all 
prizes  taken  and  brought  into  our  ports  subsequent  to  the 
above-mentioned  day  by  such  privateers;  in  defect  of  which 
the  President  considers  it  incumbent  upon  the  United  /States  to 
indemnify  the  owners  of  those  prizes;  the  indemnification  to  be 
reimbursed  by  the  French  nation."  (4  Hamilton's  Works, 
468.)  At  the  same  time  Mr.  Jefferson's  important  letter  to 
Mr.  Hammond  was  written.* 

*  Philadelphia,  September  b,  1793. 

Sir  :— I  am  honored  with  yours  of  August  30th  ;  mine  of  the  7th  of  that  month 
assured  that  measures  were  taken  for  excluding  from  all  further  asylum  in  our  ports, 
vessels  armed  in  them  to  cruise  on  nations  with  which  we  are  at  peace,  and  for  the 
restoration  of  the  prizes,  the  •'  Lovely  Lass,"  '•  Prince  William,"  "  Henry,"  and  the 
"Jane,  of  Dublin;"  and  should  the  measures  for  restitutiou  fail  in  their  effect,  the 
President  considered  it  as  incumbent  on  the  United  States  to  make  compensation 
for  the  vessels. 

We  are  bound  by  our  treaties  with'  three  of  the  belligerent  nations,  by  all  the 
means  in  our  power  to  protect  and  defend  their  vessels  and  effects  in  our  ports, 
or  waters  or  on  the  seas  near  our  shores,  and  to  recover  and^restore  the  same  to  the 
rijrht  owners,  when  taken  from  them.  If  all  the  means  in  our  power  are  used,  and 
fail  in  their  effect,  we  are  not  bound  by  our  treaties  with  those  nations  to  make  com- 
pensation. 

Though  wehaveno  similar  treaty  wi^h  Great  Britain,  it  was  the  opinion  of  the  Presi- 
dent that  we  should  use  toward  that  nation  the  same  rule,  which,  under  this  article, 
was  to  govern  us  with  the  other  nations ;  and  even  to  extend  it  to  captures  made  on 
the  high  seas  and  brought  into  our  ports;  if  done  by  vessels  which  had  been  at  war 
with  them. 

Having,  for  particular  reasons,  forborne  to  use  all  the  means  in  our  power  for  the 
restitution  of  the  three  vessels  mentioned  in  my  letter  of  August  7th,  the  President 


IS    THE   ALABAMA   A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  15 

The  basis  of  this  voluntary  action  of  our  government  was, 
that  sound  maxim  of  the  law  of  nations,  that  a  state  is  prima 
facte  responsible  for  whatever  is  done  within  its  jurisdiction, 
since  it  must  be  presumed  to  be  capable  of  preventing  or  punish- 
ing offences  committed  within  its  boundaries  ;  and  that  a  body 
politic  is,  therefore,  responsible  for  the  acts  of  individuals 
which  are  acts  of  actual  or  meditated  hostility  towards  a  nation, 
with  which  the  government  of  these  subjects  professes  to  main- 
tain relations  of  friendship  or  neutrality.  (3  Phillimore's  In- 
ternational Law,  218  ;  Grotius,  1.  ii.,  c.  21,  §  2 ;  Puffendorf,  1. 
i.,  c.  5,  §  ult.)  In  the  year  following,  upon  the  application  of 
England,  and  for  her  better  protection  (Canning's  Speeches, 
vol.  4,  pp.  152-3,  Abr.  Debates  in  Congress,  vol.  7),  we  passed  . 
the  act  of  1794 ;  and  lastly,  and  most  important  to  be  remem- 
bered when  the  day  of  settlement  comes,  we,  in  that  year, 
entered  into   a  treaty  of  amity  and  commerce  with  her,  by 

thought  it  incumbent  on  the  United  States  to  make  compensation  for  them.  And 
though  nothing  was  said  in  that  letter  of  other  vessels  taken  under  like  circumstances 
and  brought  in  after  the  5th  of  June,  and  before  the  date  of  that  letter,  yet  when 
the  8^ me  forbearance  had  taken  place,  it  was  and  is  his  opinion  that  compensation 
will  be  equally  due. 

As  to  prizes  made  under  the  same  circumstances,  and  brought  in  after  the  date  of 
that  letter,  the  President  determined  that  all  the  means  in  our  power  should  be  used 
for  their  restitution.  If  thcr^e  fail,  as  we  should  not  be  bound  by  our  treaties  to  make 
ccmpensation  to  the  other  powers  in  the  analogous  case,  he  did  not  mean  tp  give  an 
opinion  that  it  ought  to  be  done  to  Great  Britain.  But  still,  if  any  (^ases  shall  arise 
subsequent  to  that  dale,  the  circumstances  of  which  .'hall  place  them  on  similar 
ground  wiih  those  before  it,  the  President  would  think  compensation  equally  in- 
cumbent on  the  United  States. 

Ini-tructiong  are  given  to  the  governors  of  the  different  states  to  use  all  the  means 
in  their  power  for  restoring  prizes  of  this  last  description,  found  within  their  ports. 
Though  ihey  will,  <if  course,  take  measures  to  be  informed  of  them,  and  the  general 
government  has  given  them  the  aid  of  the  custom-house  officers  for  this  purpose,  yet 
you  will  be  sensible  of  the  importance  of  muliiplj-ing  the  channels  of  their  informa- 
tion EH  far  as  shall  depend  on  j'ourself,  or  any  person  under  your  direction,  in  order 
that  the  governors  may  use  the  means  in  their  power  for  making  restitution. 

Without  knowledge  of  the  capture  they  cannot  restore  it.  It  will  always  be  best 
to  give  the  notice  to  them  directly  ;  but  any  information  which  you  shall  be  pleased 
to  nend  me,  also,  at  any  time,  shall  be  forwarded  to  them  as  quickly  as  distance  will 
permit. 

Hence  you  will  perceive,  sir,  that  the  President  contemplates  restitution  or  com- 
pensation in  the  case  before  the  7th  of  Augu.-t  :  and  after  that  diite  restitution  if  it 
can  be  effected  by  any  means  in  our  power:  and  that  it  will  be  important  you  should 
8ub.'<tantiate  the  facts,  that  such  prizes  are  in  our  ports  or  waters. 

Your  list  of  the  privateers  illicitly  in  our  ports,  is,  I  believe,  correct. 

With  respect  to  losses  V)y  deieniion,  waste,  spoliation,  sustained  by  vessels  taken 
as  before-mentioned,  between  the  dates  of  .June  the  ."itli  and  Augu.-t  7th,  it  is  pro- 
posed, as  n  j)rovisional  measure,  that  the  collector  of  the  customs  of  the  district,  and 
the  British  cfinsul  or  any  other  person  you  please,  shall  appoint  persons  to  establish 
the  value  of  the  vessel  and  cargo  at  the  time  of  her  capture,  and  of  her  arrival  in 
the  port  into  which  she  is  brought,  according  to  I  heir  value  in  that  port.  If  this 
shall  be  iigrccaVile  to  you,  and  you  will  be  jileascd  to  signify  it  tonic,  with  the  names 
of  the  prizes  understood  to  be  of  this  description,  iiiclruction  will  be  given  accord- 
ingly) t**  the  collector  of  the  customs  where  the  respective  vessels  are. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  Ac. 
Oeorge  Hammond,  Esq.  Thomas  .Tkffersopc. 


16  ENGLISH   NEUTRALITY. 

•which,  on  her  demand,  we  undertook  to  pay  to  her  and  her 
citizens  all  losses  suffered  by  armed  vessels  fitted  out  in  our 
ports.* 

Our  conduct  during  this  whole  period  received,  and  still  re- 
ceives, the  commendation  of  all  enlightened  publicists.  Philli- 
more  and  Ward  are  profuse  in  their  praise  of  the  justice, 
dignity,  and  intelligence,  which  marked  the  action  of  this 
jgovernment ;  and  George  Canning  lost  no  opportunity  in  Par- 
liament to  urge  an  emulation  of  our  example.  In  the  debates, 
upon  Lord  Althorpe's  petition  for  the  repeal  of  the  Foreign 
Enlistment  Act  (Hansard's  Pari  Debates  N.  S.,  vol.  8,  pp. 
1019-59,  Canning's  Speeches,  vol.  4,  pp.  152-3),  he  said  : 

"It  surely  could  not  be  forgotten,  that,  in  1794,  this  country  complained 
of  various  breaches  of  neutrality  (though  much  inferior  to  those  now  under 
consideration),  committed  on  the  part  of  subjects  of  the  United  States. 
What  was  the  conduct  of  that  nation  in  consequence  ?  Did  she  resent  the 
complaint  as  an  infringement  of  her  independence?  Did  it  refuse  to  take 
such  steps  as  would  insure  the  immediate  observance  of  neutrality  f 
Neither.  In  1794,  immediately  after  the  application  from  the  British 
government,  the  legislature  of  the  United  States  passed  an  act,  prohibiting, 
under  heavy  penalties,  the  engagement  of  American  citizens  in  the  armies 
of  any  foreign  powers.f  Was  that  the  only  instance  of  the  kind?  It  was 
but  last  year  (1818)  that  the  United  States  passed  an  act,  by  which  the 
act  of  1794  was  confirmed  in  every  respect,  again  prohibiting  the  engage- 
ment of  their  citizens  in  the  service  of  any  foreign  powers  ;  and  pointing 
distinctly  to  the  service  of  Spain  or  the  South  American  provinces." 

He  might  have  added,  had  he  spoken  at  a  later  period,  that 
in  1838  we  again,  upon  the  request  of  Great' Britain,  called  in 
legislative  aid  ;  this  time  to  prevent  succor  to  the  Canadian 
rebellion.  Again,  in  1823,  he  said  (Canning's  Speeches,  vol. 
5,  pp.  50-1)  : 

"  If  I  wished  for  a  guide  in  a  system  of  neutrality,  I  would  take  that 
laid  down  by  America  in  the  days  of  the  presidency  of  Washington  and 
the  secretaryship  of  Jefferson.  Here,  sir,"  he  added,  after  stating  what 
we  had  done,  "I  contend,  is  the  principle  on  which  we  ought  to  act." 

*  Extract  from  7th  article  of  treaty  of  1794:  And  whereas,  certain  merchants  and 
others,  hi3  majesty's  subjects,  complain  that  in  the  course  of  the  war  they  have  sus- 
tained lo,«s  and  damage  by  reason  of  tljc  capture  of  their  vessels  and  merchandise, 
taken  within  the  limits  and  jurisdiction  of  the  States,  and  brought  into  the  ports  of 
the  same,  or  taken  by  venseU  orujinalty  armed  in  the  ports  of  the  mid  States  :  It  la 
agreed,  that  in  all  c;ises  where  restitution  shall  not  have  been  made  agreeably  to  the 
tenor  of  the  letter  from  Mr.  Jefier.^on  to  Mr.  Hammond,  of  September  6th,  1793,  the 
complaints  of  the  parties  shall  be  referred  to  the  commissioners  hereby  appointed  " 

t  It  was  because  we  Blood  by  this  very  act,  and  would  not  permit  Mr.  Crampton  to 
inlringe  it  by  recruiting  for  the  war  against  Russia,  that  we  were  pressed  almost  to 
the  point  of  hostilities  in  1855. 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  17 

After  the  treaty  of  179-t,  the  efforts  of  our  government  to 
prevent  infractions  of  its  neutrality  were  still  increased. 

In  1803  (President's  Message,  October  17),  Mr.  Jefferson 
said  : 

"  We  have  seen,  with  sincere  concern,  the  flames  of  war  lighted  up 
again  in  Europe:  and  nations,  with  which  we  have  the  most  friendly  and 
useful  relations,  engaged  in  mutual  destruotion.  *  *  *  In  the  course 
of  this  conflict,  let  it  be  our  endeavor,  as  it  is  our  interest,  to  cultivate  the 
friendship  of  the  belligerent  nations  by  every  act  of  justice  and  innocent 
kindness ;  to  receive  their  armed  vessels  with  hospitality  from  the  dis- 
tresses of  the  sea;  but  to  administer  the  means  of  annoyance  to  none;  to 
establish  in  our  harbors  such  a  police  as  may  maintain  law  and  order;  to 
restrain  our  citizens  from  embarking,  individually,  in  a  war,  in  which 
their  country  has  no  part,  dnd  to  punish  severely  those  persons,  citizen  or . 
alien,  icho  usurp  our  flag  not  entitled  to  it."* 

In  1805,  still  greater  vigor  was  announced.  Mr.  Jefferson, 
in  the  annual  message  of  that  year,  says,  after  reciting  certain 
infractions  of  our  neutrality  and  sovereignty  : 

"These  enormities  appearing  to  be  unreached  by  any  control  of  their 
Bove.eigns,  I  found  it  necessary  to  erjuip  a  force,  to  cruise  within  our  own 
seas,  to  arrest  all  vessels  of  this  de.-cription  found  hovering  on  our  coasts 
within  the  limits  of  the  Gulf  Stream,  and  to  bring  in  the  ofi'onders  for 
trial  as  pirates."     (Am.  State  Pap.,  For.  Rel.,  vol.  1,  p.  66.) 

In  1817,  Spain  was  engaged  in  a  contest  with  her  colonies. 
The  proximity  of  the  scene  of  conflict,  the  sympathy  which  our 
people  naturally  held  with  the  struggling  colonies,  and  tlie  ad- 
venturous character  of  our  seamen,  all  combined  to  make  in- 
terference feasible  and  attractive.  Many  attempts  were  made, 
the  better  to  prevent  which,  we  passed  the  act  of  1818,  alluded 
to  by  Mr.  Canning.  A  voluminous  correspondence  took  place 
between  Don  Luis  de  Oni.s,  the  Spanish  minister,  and  the  State 
Department,  touching  these  arinaineiits,  a  critical  examination 
of  which  will  show  that  the  charges  now  constantly  made  by 
the  English  press,  that  our  government  was  derelict  at  that 
time  are  not  well  founded. "j"     Some  vessels  escaped,  pel  haps,  in 

*  It  is  well  known  (hut  tho  "  Aliihanrm"  usunlly  iippronohcH  her  vicdniH  iindor  tho 
Rn(;li^h  (In;; ;  mc  |m|)(rH  in  tin;  nialter  ol  tho  "  Biilliunl,"  published  \>y  ihu  New  York 
(Jhunili.  r  ol  Coniin.  !(■<;,   \HtVZ. 

■\  'I  he  S,  unihh  ininiHter  <;«inplitinod  to  our  povcrnrncntthnl  hostilccxpcditionH  were 
bein^;  title'i  out.  in  Ijonixinnn,  to  aid  tho  inpun oetioniiry  pjirlicH  in  Wouih  Ainericii. 
The  compiiiint  was  iuiiuediutc-iy  roierrud  to  tho  proper  persou,  in  New  OrlouuH,  and 

2 


18  ENGLISH    NEUTRALITY. 

spite  of  our  vigilance.  One  case,  which  occurred  in  Baltimore, 
has  been  related  to  me  by  a  gentleman  who  was  cognizant  of 
the  fact.  A  suspected  vessel  had  been  seized,  and,  to  prevent 
her  going  to  sea  before  the  matter  could  be  investigated,  her 
sails  were  taken  from  her  r.nd  packed  in  a  warehouse.  After 
a  time,  the  captain,  who  persistently  asserted  his  innocence, 
asked  permission  to  take  the  sails  to  bpread  them  for  drying, 
they  being  in  danger  of  mildew.  The  port  officer,  a  confiding,  and 
not  over-shrewd  person,  consented,  and  in  the  night  the  vessel 
slipped  away,  leaving  the  simple  official  to  make  the  best  settle- 
ment with  his  government  that  he  could.  Upon  the  final  adjust- 
ment of  the  respective  claims  between  Spain  and  the  United 
States,  it  was  not  denied  by  us  that  we  Ayere  liable  to  make  com- 
pensation to  suff'erers  by  armed  vessels,  which  we  might  have 
stopped ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  we  took  from  Spain  a  release  from 
all  claims  of  this  character,  as  part  of  the  consideration  for  the 
concessions  which  we  then  made.  (Treaty  with  Spain,  1819.) 
An  J  on  December  7th,  1819,  President  Monroe  declared  to  the 
world,  (annual  message,)  referring  to  Spanish  matters: 

"  It  is  gratifying  to  have  it  in  my  power  to  state,  so  strong  has  been 
the  sense  throughout  the  whole  community  of  what  is  due  to  the  character 
and  ohligations  of  the  nation,  that  very  few  examples  of  a  contrary  kind 
have  occurred." 

In  1838,  our  government  was  again  zealous  in  the  enforce- 
ment of  what  had  by  this  time  become  its  traditional  policy; 
and  used  its   most  vigorous  efforts  in  endeavoring  to  prevent 

the  result  was,  that  our  own  officers  were  set  to  work,  without  Spanish  aid,  and  suc- 
ceeded in  bre;iising  up  almost  entirely  the  system. 

Many  persons  were  prosecuted  iind  seven  vessels  feized,  of  which,  three  being 
found  guilty,  were  condemned.  Nine  or  ten  prizes  were  lil)elled  and  restored  to  iheir 
Spanish  owners,  on  the  ground  thnt  the  capturing  vessels  had  been  fitted  out  and 
iirmed,  or  had  their  forces  augmented  in  the  waters  of  the  United  Stales.  Mr.  Dick, 
the  Uni'ed  States  District  Aiioruey,  say.s,  '■  It  is  notorious,  that  to  no  one  point  of 
duty  have  the  civil  and  military  aiitlioritiesof  the  United  States  more  strenuously, 
or,  it  in  believed,  more  succc-isfully,  de\  oted  their  attention,  than  to  the  discover  ng 
and  .suppressing  all  attempts  to  violate  the  law.s  in  tliis  re.-pei-t.  Such  attempts  have 
never  been  successful,  except  when  conducted  under  circumstances  of  concealment 
that  eluiled  discovery  and  almost  suspicion  ;  or  when  carried  on  at  some  remote  point 
of  the  coa-t,  beyond  the  reach  of  detection  or  discovery.  In  every  instance  wliere 
it  was  known  thiit  these  illegal  acts  were  attempting,  or  where  it  was  afterwards 
discovered  that  they  had  been  committed,  the  persons  engaged,  so  far  as  they  were 
known,  were  pro.secuied,  while  the  vessels  fitted  out  or  attempted  to  be  fitted  out, 
have  been  seived  and  libelled,  under  the  act  of  .')th  June,  1794;  and  when  captures 
have  been  made  by  vessels  thus  fitted  and  armed,  and  their  force  augmented  in  our 
waters,  and  the  prizes  brought,  witliin  our  waters,  or  even  found  upon  the  hif/h  seas 
by  our  cruigem,  they  have  been  restored  to  the  Spanish  owner,  and  in  some  instances 
damages  awarded  against  the  cupturs."     Niles'  Reg.,  p.  63. 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  19 

all  interference  by  our  people  in  the  disturbances  then  existing 
in  Canada.     In  an  official  letter,  Mr.  Webster  says: 

"  The  President  directs  me  to  say  that  it  is  his  fixed  resolution  that  all 
such  disturbers  of  the  public  peace  and  violators  of  the  laws  of  their 
country  shall  be  brought  to  exemplary  punishmeid."  (Webster's  Works, 
vol.  6,  p.  2G0.) 

In  the  same  volume  Mr.  Webster  refers  to  the  fixed  American 
doctrine  on  this  subject,  especially  the  practice  of  directing  our 
officers  to  watch  for  infringements  of  neutrality,  without  waiting 
for  information,  and  cites  the  instructions  given  our  army  during 
the  war  for  Texan  independence.     (Ibid.  p.  452.) 

The  next  occasion  on-  which  Great  Britain,  by  taking  a  bel- 
ligerent attitude,  forced  upon  us  the  embarrassment  and  an- 
noyance of  the  neutral  character,  was  during  the  war  with 
Russia,  in  1854-6.  It  has  been  very  loosely  charged  that,  at 
that  time,  armaments  for  Russia  were  permitted  to  go  on  here, 
and  that  some  war-vessels  intended  for  that  nation  escaped. 
The  best  investigation  which  I  have  been  able  to  give  to  that 
period  fails  to  discover  any  vessel  which  can  be  traced  to  the 
Russians,  or  which  ever  caused,  or  attempted  to  cause,  damage 
to  the  other  belligerents.  During  that  war,  much  excitement 
was  caused  in  England  by  the  announcement  that  the  barque 
Maury,  of  New  York,  belonging  to  a  highly  respectable  mer- 
cantile firm  (the  owners  of  the  Jacob  Bell,  lately  burned  by 
the  Florida),  had  been  detected  in  shipping  arms  to  the  enemy, 
and  had  been  seized.  The  real  truth  about  that  matter  seems 
never  yet  to  have  reached  the  British  public.  The  facts  were, 
that  the  barque  was  openly  advertised  for  China,  and  was 
loading  on  freight.  She  was  seized  on  the  application  of  the 
British  consul,  sustained  by  very  suspicious  affidavits.  An 
examination  of  her  cargo,  &c.,  proved  her  innocence,  and  the 
consul  made  a  public  apology  in  the  columns  of  the  New  York 
Herald  of  October  24,  1855,  for  the  seizure.*  The  owners 
did  not  let  the  matter  rest,  however,  but  procured  an  investi- 

*  The  following  letter  will  show  the  motives  and  j)r()mi)tiie«s  with  which  our 
governucnt  then  uctcd  : 

ATTonNKY-OKNKRAi,'8  Oki'ice,  22d  October,  1856. 

Sin: — I  liavo  received  your  letter  of  the  lUlh  iiiwtunt,  eoiiimuiiieuting  tin;  result 
of  inquiry  re^riirdinj;  the  biircjue  "Maury." 

The  ttllegiition  ii(;iiin!-t  that  ve.snel  wan  iin))rol>iihlu  rm  its  face  ;  hut,  determined  iw 
the  PrcHiilent  in  not  to  Muller  any  of  the  l)elli;;er(;nt  powerM  to  Ireapa^'.s  on  llie  neutral 
right!)  of  the  United  States,  it  wu»  deemed  proper  to  iuvetiligate  the  case,  out  of  ro- 


20  ENGLISH    NEUTRALITY. 

gation  by  the  New  York  Chamber  of  Commerce,  a  committee 
of  wliich  body,  composed  of  gentlemen  whose  probity  cannot 
be  doubted,  reported,  among  other  things: 

"  The  committee  have  it  from  the  highest  authority,  that  the  Govern- 
ment has  no  knowledge,  belief,  or  suspicion,  that  any  privateer  or  other 
armed  vessel  is  fitting  out,  or  has  been  fittted  out,  in  this  country,  for  or 
against  any  of  the  European  belligerents."*  (Report  on  seizure  of  the 
barque  Maury,  N.  Y.  Cbamb.  Com.,  1855.) 

spcct  for  the  British  minister,  through  whom  the  British  consul  at  New  York,  pre- 
ftrrcii  couiplaiiit  in  tlic  premises. 

It  is  made  manife.-^t.  by  tlie  documents  which  you  transmit,  that  the  suspicions  of 
the  British  consul  as  to  the  characier  and  destination  of  the  "Maury,"  were  wholly 
erroneous;  and  justice  to  her  owners  and  freighters  requires  that  the  libel  against 
her  be  dismissed. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be, 

Very  respectfully, 

C.  Cpsbing. 
Hon.  John  McKeon, 

Attorney  of  United  States,  New  York. 

*  At  Ihe  same  time  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  passed  the  following  resolutions 
which  they  justly  claimed  as  expressing  the  universal  sentiment  of  the  American 
public  : 

"1.  Resolved,  That  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  New  York,  receive  and  adopt 
the  report  as  a  correct  statement,  and  as  containing  the  sense  of  this  body  on  the 
subject. 

'•  2.  liesoh-cfl,  That  no  proper  amends  or  apoloiry  have  been  made  to  A.  A.  Low  & 
Brothers,  for  the  charge  broujiht  against  them,  whiih,  if  irue,  would  have  rendered 
them  infanious ;  nor  to  the  mei  chants  of  this  city  and  country,  so  falsely  and  injuri- 
ously assailed. 

"  3.  Jie'olved,  That  the  merchants  of  New  York,  as  part  of  the  body  of  merchants 
of  the  United  States,  will  uphold  the  government  in  the  lull  mainten^mce  of  the  neu- 
trality laws  of  the  country  ;  and  we  acknowledge  and  adopt,  ai!d  always  have  re- 
garded, ihe  acts  of  the  United  States  for  pie>erving  its  neutrality  as  binding  in 
honor  and  con.'cience,  as  well  as  in  law  ;  and  that  we  denounce  those  who  violate 
them  as  disturbers  of  the  peace  of  the  world,  to  be  held  in  universal  abhorrence." 

It  would  be  impossible  to  illustrate  the  difference  of  conduct  on  the  part  of  Euglaud  and 
Anit-rica.  lieiier  llmu  by  prinling  side  l>y  side  tl^e  papers  it'  ilieca.-e.s-fibe  "  Miinry"aud  ihe  '  Ala- 
bama '  That  cauuoi  hf  doue  here  tnr  want  of  space,  but  sul)siauaiilly  llie  facts  were  as  follows: 

TliC  British  consul  ihi-ough  ihe  British  .Minister  gave  notice  to  our  govemnieut  that  'a  person 
(name  nut  given;,  who  deponent  believes  to  be  in  the  p^y  of  Kussia,  h  s  given  hini  a  full  expla- 
Daiiuu  of  the  ariiiameut  on  board  the  said  ve-sel  ;"  .  .  .  also,  ibat  this  deponent  ''gathered 
fniiii  the  person  in  question  that  the  said  '  Maury'  would  wheu  outside,  ship  a  new  crew  of  about 
ei/jhty  meu.''  &c  ,  lo  go  in  puisuit  <if  ihe  (  uiiard  steamers  This  s  aieinent  of  the  cimul's  was 
backed  liy  iheaHidavusof  two  policemen,  who  swore  iipou  inlormation  and  belief  that  the  vessel 
was  fined  out  as  a  Kussian  privateer,  but  slated  no  other  iulormaiiou  or  grautid  of  belief  than 
Bhe  bad  la)<eu  on  b"ard  some  cannon, small  arms,  and  cannon  I  all,  and  thai  the  mate  said  that  it 
was  a  ■dauined  queer  cargo'  for  the  ChiuaSeas.  Our  goveruinent,  a  appears  by  Mr  Cusliing's 
letter,  c  nsideied  "the  allegaiioo  against  the  vessel  as  improbable  on  its  lace,"  but  still  ordered 
it  to  be  seized  and  held  until  ihe  truth  cmld  be  ascertained.  The  seizure  o  the  vessel  was  the 
first  notice  to  the  owners  that  airy  suspicion  of  her  waseuierlaiued  ;  and  they  immediately  made 
a  full  and  flank  statement  concerning  her,  by  which  a  d  the  subsequent  investigation  it  ap- 
peared that  she  was  blading  on  fieiglil  forChina  ;  that  there  was  uothina  peculiar  about  her  rig 
or  build  ;  and  that  the  cannon  were  shipped  ou  freight  to  an  American  gentleman  in  Canton ; 
and  that  ihe  addition  to  her  armament  of  two  guns  was  on  aceouiit  of  ihe  iucreasnig  danger 
from  Chinese  pirates.  The  libel  was  afier  these  exjilauatious  "  lifted,"  wiih  the  consent  of  the 
counsel  for  ihe  Bnlisli  cou»ul 

The  distinguishing  features  of  this  case  are  the  promptness  with  which  the  vessel  was  seized 
and  Itfid  uniil  the  suspicions  againsi  her  should  be  removed;  and  the  readiness  of  the  owners 
to  five  all  iijfoimiiiou  concerning  her 

In  the  case  of  the  "Alaliaina,"  as  has  been  shown,  the  British  government  refused  to  interfere 
with  the  Ireedorn  of  the  suspected  vessel  iinii.  piouf  sufficient  to  cotiV  ct  tier  was  pioduced,  and 
by  their  c»piiotisness  and  delay  gave  her  pleniy  of  tune  to  get  away  bel'ore  any  proceedings 
Could  be  iustiiured  ;  and  meanwhile  her  owners,  thoiigii  adiii  Iting  thai  she  wan  a  war-vessel 
built  for  a  forei.n  government,  refused  to  give  any  furiher  infoimaiion  about  her. 

Cue  of  the  afndavits  presented  to  the  Board  of  Customs  and  Lord  Kussell,  was  that  of  William 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  21 

The  case  of  the  Grand  Admiral  is  another  frequently  al- 
luded to  by  the  British  press,  and  it  is  only  necessary  to  say 
that  this  ship  was  ordered  by  the  Russian  government  before 
the  outbreak  of  hostilities  ;  that  its  construction  was  suspended 
during  the  whole  of  the  war ;  and  that  she  did  not  sail  from 
this  country  until  1859,  three  years  after  peace  was  declared. 
(See  letter  of  W.  II.  Webb,  Esq.,  published  by  N.  Y.  Chamb. 
of  Com.,  1863.) 

The  purchase  and  clearance  of  the  steamship  "  United 
States"  is  now  being  made  use  of  by  those  English  journals 
which  are  conducted  in  the  interest  of  the  rebellion,  to  justify, 
by  an  American  precedent,  the  piratical  enterprises  in  Avhich 
British  merchants  are  now  encraged.  In  this,  as  in  all  the 
other  cases,  an  American  may  well  say  : 

"Mark,  now,  how  plain  a  tale  sliall  put  you  down." 

In  1848,  an  attempt  was  made  to  consolidate  the  German 
people  into  one  government.  The  new  government  sent  com- 
missioners to  this  country  to  purchase  some  steam  war  vessels. 
The  commissioners  addressed  our  government,  openly  through 
the  German  minister,  and  the  President,  in  courtesy,  granted 
the  services  of  some  of  our  naval  officers  to  aid  in  the  selection, 
and  the  use  of  our  navy-yard,  for  the  refitting  of  the  steamer 
in  question.  While  this  was  going  on,  the  government  at 
Washington  were  informed  that  the  purchasers  of  this  steamer 
were  in  some  way  parties  to  a  petty  controversy,  then  pro- 
gressing, under  the  name  of  the  SchlesAvig- Ilolstein  war. 
Upon  receipt  of  this  information,  all  facilities  for  finishing  the 
vessel  were  at  once  withdrawn,  and  it  was  only  after  a  long 
negotiation  that  she  was  permitted  to  sail,  without  arms,  with 
just  men  enough  to  take  her  across  the  Atlantic ;  and  only 
after  having  given  bonds  in  §900,000  that  she  should  ntver  be 
used  against  any  nation  with  whom  we  were  at  peace.  She 
reached   Liverpool,  and    there   reiiiained    until    i)eace  was   de- 

HaHMinore,  who  wwore  lie  had  been  engaged  by  Capt.  Batcher  fo  nail  In  the  "  290,"  with  the  nx- 
jMCMi  un<l<T-tan<lluK  lliat  i-h<*  was  g"lii({  to  ll^lit  for  llio  "govt-rninout  of  llio  (Jonfinlonilo  Slali'h 
of  America  "  Thai  hfi  had  joiui-d  the  v««Hel  In  Mi-nnrH  I.aird  &  <;o  '»  yanl  at  IJirki-riliead,  and 
remained  on  her  Meveral  <lrty».  Tlial  l.e  fonnd  aliont  thirty  old  meii-ol'-war'R  men  on  h.iird, 
among  wlioin  it  waH  "  vw-ll  known  that  nhe  wan  Koing  ont  an  a  privateer  for  tlie  (;.inlHdrtrato 
government  to  net  agalnnt  ths  inlied  HIateM,  ninler  a  ecmimli-Mion  IVoin  Mr.  .lelfnrHon  KiiviM  " 

Yot,  tliii  rftlhlavii,  proviii^f,  prinuifacii:,  as  It  dooH  the  characior  of  the  ve»Kel,  wa«,  with  olherd 
KOHtalninK  ll.  In  the  hand-  of  Kn^linh  odlciaJH  for  at  leatt  ten  ilay  before  ihey  were  hIiIimo  dei.ir- 
miue  wlierher  they  nhonid  take  tlie  prfraulvm  of  Imldiny  Ihf  vessel  to  abide  the  event  of  ex<<ml- 
Dat.on  Nor  ha«  any  ai^lion  yei  bi'en  taken  iimln-l  (;Hpt  Hiiicnor  for  a  crinilnal  infriiiKeniinl 
of  the  241  Heclion  of  .'iD  (ieo.  Ill  ,  which,  nuder  xevere  penaltie-,  forbidH  the  hiring  ur  uuli-<tlug 
any  man  to  lu-rve  aKHUiot  a  friendly  nation. 

The  diatiuguiithlijg  features  of  Ihta  caite  do  uot  nxjulre  to  be  pointed  ont. 


22  ENGLISH    NEUTRALITY. 

cleared,  and,  shortly  after,  was  changed  into  a  passenger-ship, 
and  plied  between  this  port  and  Galway,  as  the  "  Indian  Em- 
pire." (Letter  of  Leopold  Bierwith,  Esq.,  pub.  by  N.  Y. 
Chamb.  of  Com.,  1863.) 

Thus  stands  the  record  of  American  neutrality.  History 
may  be  fairly  challenged  to  show  another  instance  of  such 
ma^ynanimity,  consistency,  and  fairness. 

Should  we  examine  thoroughly  the  record  of  Great  Britain 
upon  this  matter  of  maritime  neutrality,  it  would  be  found 
entirely  consistent  on  one  point — "Britannia  rules  the  waves." 
To  express  the  probable  reasons  for  whatever  inconsistencies 
on  other  points  history  might  discover,  would  necessitate  harsh 
allusions  to  that  national  greed  and  arrogance  which  the  tradi- 
tions of  mankind  have  ascribed  to  the  insular  kingdom.  And 
since  it  is  not  the  purpose  of  this  discussion  to  revive  memories 
of  past  misconduct,  but  instead,  to  discover  the  true,  legal,  and 
moral  'obligations  which  bind  nations  as  they  may  be  derived 
from  instances  of  past  good  conduct,  it  will  be  necessary  to 
cite  but  two  cases — and  those  the  most  notable — in  which 
Great  Britain  has  been  called  upon  to  declare  her  understand- 
ing of  what  true  neutrality  consists  in.  It  will  be  seen  that 
in  one  case  she  demands,  and  in  the  other  performs,  neutrality. 

The  first  instance  has  special  relation  to  rebellion,  being  the 
protest  of  England  against  the  clandestine  assistance  which 
France  permitted  her  citizens  to  give  the  revolted  American 
colonies,  or  rather  her  statement  of  reasons  justifying  war  upon 
France  for  that  cause.  The  written  statement  of  these  just 
grounds  of  war  is  found  in  the  celebrated  Memoire  Justificatif 
understood  to  have  been  prepared  for  the  king  by  the  historian 
Gibbon.  But  for  the  proper  names  and  dates  there  given,  one 
might  suppose  that  Mr.  Gibbon,  with  prophetic  foresight,  had 
prepared  this  document  for  presentation  by  Mr.  Adams  to  the 
English  government  of  the  present  day.* 

*  The  following  extracts  are  mndc  from  the  Memoire  Justificatif,  which  may  be 
found  i.riiitcrl  in  full  in  the  British  Annual  Register  for  1779,  vol.  xxii.,  p.  404. 

"  An  enterprise  so  vain  and  so  diflicult  as  that  of  hiding  from  the  eyes  of  Great 
Britain  and  of  all  Eun.jic  the  pi-oecedings  of  a  commeroial  company  associated  for 
furnishing  the  Americans  with  whatever  could  nourish  and  maintain  the  fire  of  a 
revolt,  was  not  attempted.  The  informed  public  named  the  chief  of  the  enterprise, 
wh  .fc  house  was  established  at  Paris:  his  correspondents  at  Dunlurk,  Nunlz,  and 
Bordeaux,  were  efjually  kn<.wn.  The  immense  magazines  which  they  formed,  and 
which  they  replenished  every  day,  were  laden  in  ships  that  they  Ijuilt  or  bought, 
and  they  scarcely  dissembled  their  objects  or  the  place  of  their  destiniition.  These 
vessels  commonly  took  false  clearances  for  the  French  islands  in  America,  but  the 
commodities  which  composed  their  cargoes  were  sufficient  before  the  time  of  their 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  23 

The  instance  selected  to  show  to  wliat  length  Great  Britain 
feels  herself  bound  to  go  in  the  performance  of  neutral  obliga- 
tions relates  to  the  conflict  between  Donna  Maria  and  Don 
Miguel  for  the  crown  of  Portugal.  In  1827,  Don  Pedro, 
having  retained  to  himself  the  empire  of  the  Brazils,  formally 
renounced  the  throne  of  Portugal  in  favor  of  his  daughter, 
Donna  Maria,  and  appointed  his  brother,  Don  Miguel,  regent 
of  the  kingdom.  Donna  Maria  was  recognized  by  Great  Britain 
and  all  the  great  powers  as  the  lawful  sovereign  of  Portugal. 
In  1828,  however,  Don  Miguel  induced  a  revolt,  procured  him- 

Bailing  to  discover  the  fraud  and  artifice.  These  suspicions  were  quickly  confirmed 
by  the  course  they  held,  and  at  the  end  of  a  few  weeks  it  was  not  surprij^ing  to  hear 
they  had  fallen  into  the  hands  of  ttie  king's  officers,  cruising  in  the  American  seas, 
who  took  tliein  even  within  sight  of  the  coasts  of  the  revolted  colonies.  This  vigi- 
lance was  but  too  well  justified  by  the  conduct  of  those  who  had  the  luck  or  cunning 
to  escape  it,  since  they  approached  America  only  to  deliver  to  the  rebels  the  arms 
and  ammunition  which  they  had  taken  on  bo.nrd  for  their  service.  The  marks  of 
the.«e  facts,  which  could  be  cotjsidered  only  as  manliest  breaches  of  the  faith  of 
treaties,  multiplied  continually,  and  the  diligence  of  the  king's  ambassador  to  com- 
municate his  complaint  and  proofs  to  the  ciurt  of  Versailles,  did  not  leave  him  the 
shameful  and  humiliating  resource  of  appearing  ignorant  of  what  was  carried  on 
and  daily  repented  in  the  very  heart,  of  tlio  country.  He  pointed  out  the  names, 
number,  and  ([uality  of  the  sliips  that  the  conimcrcial  agents-  of  America  had  fitted 
out  in  the  ports  of  Fr.Tnco,  to  carry  to  the  rebels  arms,  warlike  stores,  and  even 
French  officers  who  had  engaged  in  the  service  oT  the  revolted  culonics.  The  dates, 
places,  and  persons,  were  always  specified  with  a  precision  that  att'orded  the  minis- 
ters of  his  moj^t  Christian  majesty  the  greatest  facility  of  being  assured  of  these  re- 
ports and  of  stopping  in  time  the  progress  of  these  illicit  armaments.  Among  a 
crowd  of  examples  which  accuse  the  court  of  Versailles  of  want  of  attention  to  fulfil 
the  conditions  of  peace,  or  ratlier  its  constant  attention  to  nourish  fear  and  discord, 
it  is  impossible  to  enumerate  them  all — it  is  very  difficult  to  select  the  musl  striking 
objects. 

"Nine  large  ships,  fitted  out  and  freighted  by  the  Sieur  de  Beaumarchais  and  his 
partners,  in  the  month  of  Januarj',  1777,  are  not  ciaifounded  with  the  Ampliitrito, 
which  carried  about  tlie  same  time  a  great  quantity  of  ammunition  and  thirty 
French  officers,  who  passed  with  impunity  into  the  service  of  the  rebels.  Every 
month,  almost  every  day,  furnished  new  subjects  of  complaint ;  and  a  short  memor- 
ial that  Viscount  Stormont,  the  king's  ambassador,  cominunicateil  to  the  Count  do 
Vergcnnes  in  the  month  of  Novonilier  in  the  same  year,  will  give  a  just  but  very 
imperfect  idea  ot  the  wrongs  whiih  ISritain  had  so  often  sustaine<l. 

"  There  is  a  sixty-gun  ship  at  Hock|)ort,  and  an  Kast  India  ship,  picreeil  for  sixty 
guns,  at  L'Orient.  These  two  !-h\\>*  are  ilc-tinod  for  the  service  of  tin-  rebels.  They 
are  bidcn  with  difierent  merchandize,  and  freighted  by  Messrs.  Cleaumoiit,  llolkcn  A 
Lcbatier.  The  shij)  Llleureux  sailecl  Irom  jMar-^eilles  the  L'lith  of  iSepteiuber  under 
another  name;  she  goes  straight  to  Now  Ilampsliire,  tliough  it  is  pretended  siio  is 
bound  to  the  French  Islands.  'J'hey  have  been  permitted  to  take  on  boanl  three 
thousiind  musket-'  and  twenty-five  thou-and  pounds  of  hulpbiir — a  merchandi/e  as 
necessary  to  the  Americans  IIS  useless  to  the  isliinds.  This  ship  is  commanded  liy 
M.  fiUndi,  a  French  officer  of  di-tinction,  formerly  lieutenant  to  M.  de  Itouganvillu. 
L'llippopotniiie,  belonging  to  the  Siciir  Moauinarcliais,  will  have  on  board  four  ihou- 
santl  muskets  and  many  warlike  stores  for  the  u-e  of  the  rebels.  There  are  about 
fifty  French  ships  laden  with  ammunition  for  the  use  of  the  rebels,  |)repiiriiig  to 
sail  to  North  Aiucru-n.  They  will  go  from  Naiit/.,  Ii'OrienI,  St.  iMiilo,  llavri',  Itor- 
dcaiix,  Bayoniie,  and  other  (liflerent  ports.  'I'lie-c  arc  the  namci  of  some  of  Iho 
pcrs'ins  principally  interested,  M.  tMeHiim<mt,  M.  Menton,''  Ac,  Ac. 

"  In  this  kingdom,  where  the  will  of  the  prince  meets  witli  no  obstnclo,  suceorn  10 
considenibie,  so  pnbliir.  so  long  sui'iiorted,  in  fine,  ho  neeessary  to  inainluin  the  war 
in  America,  .'how  cleiirly  enough  the  iiiost  senret  intention-' of  the  niont  ('hri"liiin 
king's  ministers.  IJut  they  still  enrriul  further  ihi^r  forgeifulneHH  or  contenipl  of 
the  most  solemn  engagements,  and  it  was  not  without  their 'permission  thai  an  uii- 


24  ENGLISH    NEUTRALITY. 

self  to  be  proclaimed  king,  and  succeeded  in  expelling  the 
queen  and  her  friends  from  most  of  her  dominions.  Terceira, 
one  of  the  Azore  Islands,  remained  faithful  to  her  and  in  her 
possession.  The  Brazilian  envoy  at  London  applied  to  the 
British  government  for  assistance,  on  the  ground  that  the  queen 
was  the  legitimate  sovereign  and  Don  Miguel  a  usurper.  These 
facts  were  admitted  by  Lord  Aberdeen,  who  refused  assistance, 
however,  assigning  as  the  reason  that,  as  England  could  not 
take  notice  of  the  merits  of  the  domestic  quarrels  of  another 
country,  she  must  therefore  conduct  herself  between  the  two 
according  to  the  strict  rule  of  duty  governing  neutral  nations. 
About  this  time  a  number  of  Portuguese  refugees  arrived  in 
England  and  took  up  their  residence  in  Portsmouth.  It  was 
suspected  (I  quote  the  language  of  Phillimore)  that  they  were 

derhand  and  dangerous  war  issued  from  the  ports  of  France  under  the  deceitful 
mask  of  pence  and  the  pretended  flag  of  the  American  colonies,  The  favorable  re- 
ception thai  their  agents  found  with  the  ministers  of  the  court  of  Versailles,  quickly 
encouraged  them  to  form  and  execute  the  audacious  project  of  establishing  a 
place  of  arms  in  the  country  which  had  served  them  for  an  asylum.  They  had 
brought  with  them,  or  knew  how  to  fabricate,  letters  of  marque  in  the  name  of  the 
American  Congress,  who  had  the  impudence  to  usurp  all  the  rights  of  sovereignty. 
The  partnership,  whose  interested  views  easily  embarked  in  all  their  designs,  fitted 
out  ships  that  they  had  either  built  or  purchased.  They  aimed  them  to  cruise  in 
the  European  seas ;  nay,  even  on  the  coasts  of  G'-eat  Britain.  To  save  appearances, 
the  captains  of  those  corsairs  hoisted  the  pretended  American  flag,  but  their  crews 
were  always  composed  of  a  great  number  of  Frenchmen,  who  enieied  with  impunity 
under  the  very  eyes  of  their  governors  and  the  officers  of  the  maritime  provinces. 
And  numerous  swarms  of  these  corsairs,  animated  by  a  spirit  of  rapine,  sailed  from 
the  ports  of  France,  and  after  cruising  in  the  British  seas,  re-entered  or  took  shelter 
in  the  same  ports.        *  *  *  *  *  *  * 

"To  the  first  representation  of  the  king's  ambassadors  upon  the  subject  of  the 
privateers  which  were  fitted  out  in  the  ports  of  France  under  American  colors,  the 
ministers  of  his  most  Christian  majesty  replied,  with  expressions  of  surprise  and 
indignation,  and  by  a  positive  declaration  that  attempts  so  contrary  to  the  faith  of 
treaties  and  the  public  tranquillity  should  never  be  suffered.  The  train  of  events, 
of  which  a  small  number  have  been  shown,  soon  manifested  the  inconstancy,  or 
rather  the  falsehood,  of  the  court  of  Versailles ;  and  the  king's  ambassador  was 
ordered  to  represent  to  the  French  minisiers  the  serious  but  inevitable  consequences 
of  their  policy.  He  fulfilled  his  eomraissinn  with  all  the  consideration  due  to  a  re- 
spectable power,  the  preservation  of  whose  friend.-hip  was  desired,  but  wi'h  a  friend- 
ship worthy  of  a  sovereign,  and  a  nation  little  accustomed  to  do  or  to  suffer  injustice. 
The  court  of  Versailles  was  called  upon  to  explain  its  conduct  and  intentions  without 
delay  or  evasion,  and  the  king  proposed  to  it  the  alternative  of  peace  or  war. 
France  cho^e  peace,  in  order  to  wound  her  eni-my  more  surely  and  secretly,  without 
having  anything  to  dread  from  her  justice.  She  severely  condemned  those  succors 
and  those  armaments,  that  the  principles  of  public  equity  would  not  permit  her  to 
justify.  She  declared  to  the  king's  ambassador  that  she  was  resolved  to  banish  the 
American  corsairs  immediately  iroui  all  the  i)orts  of  France,  never  to  return  again; 
and  that  shi;  would  take,  in  future,  the  most  rigiirou.s  precautions  to  jjrevent  the 
sale  of  prizes  taken  from  the  subjects  of  Great  Britain.  The  orders  given  to  that 
efiFect  astonished  the  partisans  of  the  rebels,  and  seemed  to  check  the  progress  of 
the  evil;  but  subjects  of  comjilaint  sprung  up  again  daily;  and  the  manner  in 
which  these  orders  were  fir.^t  eluded,  then  \iolated,  and  at  length  entirely  forgotten 
by  the  merchants,  privateers,  nay,  even  liy  the  royal  ofiicers,  were  not  excusable  by 
the  protestations  of  friendship,  with  which  the  court  of  Versailles  accompanied  those 
infractions  of  peace,  until  the  very  moment  that  the  treaty  of  alliance,  which  it  had 
signed  with  the  agents  of  the  revolted  American  colonics,  was  announced  by  the 
French  ambassador  in  London." 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  25 

meditating  to  fit  out  some  expedition  from  these  ports  against 
Don  Miguel,  and  the  government,  holding  that  to  permit  this 
would  be  a  breach  of  neutrality,  informed  the  Brazilian  minis- 
ter that  it  would  allow  no  such  design  to  be  carried  on  in 
British  harbors,  and  that,  for  security's  sake,  the  refugees  must 
remove  farther  from  the  coast.  The  envoy  stated  that  those 
troops  were  about  to  be  conveyed  to  Brazil^  and  accordingly 
four  vessels,  having  on  board  six  hundred  and  twenty-five  un- 
armed men,  sailed  from  Plymouth,  The  government  suspected 
that  the  true  design  was  to  land  these  troops  on  Terceira,  and, 
having  given  them  notice  before  they  sailed  that  any  such  at- 
tempt would  be  resisted,  dispatched  a  fleet  of  armed  vessels  to 
watch  and  prevent  a  landing.  The  expedition  appeared  off 
Terceira,  and,  being  perceived  by  the  English  captain,  was 
fired  into  and  stopped,  one  man  being  killed.  The  Portuguese 
commander  insisted  upon  his  right  to  disembark  upon  the  loyal 
territoi-y  of  his  sovereign,  but  being  unarmed  was  unable  to 
enforce  his  right,  and  his  whole  expedition  was  conducted 
several  hundred  miles  to  sea  and  there  left,  the  English  fleet 
returning  to  stand  guard  at  the  island.  This  act  caused  great 
excitement  in  England,  and  in  Parliament  the  questions  of  in- 
ternational law  involved  were  discussed  with  much  ability. 
The  government  defended  itself  on  the  ground  ''  that  the 
refugees  had  fitted  out  a  warlike  armament  in  a  British  port ; 
that  the  armament,  having  been  equipped  under  the  disguise 
of  going  to  Brazil,  had  not  been  stoj)ped  before  sailing  ;  and 
that  they  loere  therefore  hound^  by  the  duty  of  neutrality,  to  pre- 
vent by  force  an  armament  so  equipped  from  disembarking, 
even  in  the  Queeyi  of  Portugal's  dominions."  The  government 
was  sup[)orted  by  a  majority  in  both  houses  of  Parliaint'iit. 
(Br.  Annual  Register  for  1829  ;  3  Pliilii.,  221).) 

'I'lius  we  have,  by  a  fair  examination  of  the  customary  law  of 
nations,  and  the  general  conduct  thereunder  of  iMigland  and 
America  respectively,  aiiivc^l  at  a  point  from  which  we  niay 
look  about  us  and  obtain  a  tohiraldy  clear  view  of  the  legal 
conclusi(ms  ami  consecjuences  which  follow  and  belong  to  the 
unneutral  acts  of  permitting  the  initial  departure,  the  continucil 
depreilations,  subse(|uent  return,  refitting,  and  de|)arlure  of  the 
Alabama  and  Florida  from  ]>ritish  jxjrt.s.  From  this  general  view 
we  perceive,  as  a  matter  of  law,  that  neutrals  are  bound  at  all 
hazards  to  |)revent,  among  other  things,  the  fitting  out  in  their 


26  ENGLISH   NEUTRALITY. 

dominions  of  warlike  expeditions  and  armaments  against  either 
belligerent ;  we  see  also,  from  the  law  and  practice  of  Great 
Britain  in  other  cases,  that  all  facilities  for  this  purpose  exist  in 
that  kingdom,  and  that  they  may  be  and  have  been  employed  by 
the  authorities  of  their  own  motion  ;  and  we  gather,  from  the 
spirit  and  language  of  the  llemoire  Justificatif,  that,  in  1779, 
Great  Britain  considered  that  the  practice  of  casting  upon  the 
representatives  of  the  offended  belligerent — strangers  in  the 
land — all  the  burden  of  proving  the  guilty  character  of  such 
enterprises  before  any  intervention  of  the  neutral  government 
can  be  obtained,  is  but  little  better  than  a  fraudulent  evasion 
of  international  duties.  We  gather  also  that  America,  in  1793, 
and  at  all  times  since,  has  acted  in  good  faith  upon  the  same 
opinion,  always  interposing  at  the  request  of  foreign  powers 
and  requiring  its  own  officers  to  be  vigilant  and  positive  in  the 
effort  to  detect  and  suppress  unneutral  preparations  ;  and  that 
as  between  this  nation  and  Great  Britain  the  latter  has  de- 
manded and  we  have  always  rendered  the  fullest  and  freest 
performance  of  neutral  obligations.  It  is  also  seen  that  by 
reason  and  usage  the  failure  of  a  neutral  nation  to  perform  in 
good  faith,  and  to  the  best  of  its  ability,  its  obligations  in  this 
respect,  is  deemed  to  sustain  a  claim  for  compensation  for  all 
pecuniary  damage  growing  out  of  its  derelictions  ;  and  even  to 
justify  reprisals  and  absolute  war. 

Yet,  nothwithstanding  all  this,  we  find  that  Great  Britain 
has  permitted,  within  her  harbors  and  domain,  the  fitting  out 
of  armaments  notoriously  intended  to  cruise  against  our  com- 
merce ;  and  that  the  hostile  armament  has  been  permitted  to 
sail  unopposed  from  English  shores  upon  its  criminal  business 
of  lighting  up  the  seas  with  burning  merchantmen,  days  after 
the  government  had  been  in  possession  of  what  itself  admitted 
to  be  sufficient  proof  of  its  clandestine  character.  Indeed,  on 
the  contrary  from  the  Alabama  being  opposed,  it  is  stated  by 
the  press,  that  the  officials  of  the  "  circumlocution  office,"  in 
the  prosecution  of  the  great  business  of  "  How  not  to  do  it," 
decided  upon  the  value  of  a  breach  of  the  law  of  nations,  by 
receiving  a  bond  of  twenty  thousand  pounds  as  the  considera- 
tion and  indemnification  for  permitting  the  Alabama  to  pro- 
ceed to  sea,  thus  making  the  British  nation  a  partner  in  her 
crimes  and  surety  for  all  her  acts  of  pecuniary  damage.  And 
the  only  excuse  for  this  unprecedented  fraud  is  drawn  from  the 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  27 

State  of  a  queen's  advocate's  digestion  ;  national  honor,  inter- 
national justice,  and  the  peace  of  great  nations  bound  up  -with 
the  bandages  of  Sir  John  D.  Harding's  gouty  toe !  Moreover, 
although  the  culprit  defies  English  revenue  laws  by  sailing 
without  a  clearance  ;  and  although  the  true  nature  of  her 
voyage  is  soon  made  known  in  England  by  her  burnings  and 
destroyings  ;  and  although  she  was  known  to  be  destined  for 
the  neighborhood  of  certain  British  ports,  and  does  in  fact 
make  her  appearance  and  cruise  there  for  months,  she  is  at  the 
end  of  that  time  permitted  to  enter  and  lie  in  safety  in  a 
British  port,  without  any  effort  to  seize  or  detain  her  ;  but,  on 
the  contrary,  the  local  authorities  of  Kingston  are  seen  coming 
actively  to  her  assistance,  and  returning  her  escaped  crew  by 
force,  the  same  as  if  she  were  a  lawfully  commissioned  vessel, 
with  whom  the  seamen  might  have  a  laAyful  contract  of  service. 
The  legal  liabilities  which,  under  these  circumstances,  attach 
to  the  offending  nation,  are  easily  understood.  Every  nation, 
while  it  maintains  the  semblance  of  domestic  government,  is 
responsible  for  the  execution  of  its  own  laws,  especially  such 
as  are,  in  their  nature,  promises  or  compacts  with  other  na- 
tions.* If  the  Confederate  States  were  an  independent  and 
recognized  nation,  so  that  these  vessels  could  have  a  bona  fide 
national  character,  England  would  still,  under  the  circum- 
stances of  their  outfit,  be  responsible  for  them  as  if  they  were 
her  own.  And  this  would  be  so  even  if  ail  tlie  persons  en- 
gaged in  the  matter  were  foreigners  in  England;  for  a  stran- 
ger owes  the  same  allegiance  to  the  laws  of  a  country,  while 
he  remains  in  it,  as  a  citizen;  and  the  law  has  equal  power 
over  him  to  compel  his  obedience;  and,  consequently,  the 
government  of  the  State  has  no  ground  here  for  a  distiiielion 
as  to  the  liability  it  shall  bear.  It  was  upon  this  principle 
that,  by  the  treaty  of  1794,  this  nation  agreed  to  make  c(»m- 

*  Indccrl,  n  stnte  may  not  fnkc  icU\<;c  Vieliin'l  dcfcotH  of  il.s  miinicipnl  Inwc  :  for  it 
ifl  bound  at  its  own  peril  to  i)roviflc  eflcctivc  (ioincMtic  innohiiicry  lo  exi-ciito  itn  in- 
terniitioiiiil  riutios.  It  wiis  u[)on  thi.n  princifxil  fliaf  En^jliirnl  mIoocI  in  tho  matter  of 
AlexandtT  Mcl.eod  in  I8;i8.  MrLcoil  hml  done  an  iicl  Cor  (lie  llrillfh  ({"veinmont, 
for  whieh  lie  wii."  arri-xted  «•<  an  ofleiKler  a;;ain^l  tlie  lawy  of  A'«i/'  )'«;■/•.  Ilii*  j:overn- 
ment  avoweil  the  rcfjionMiliility  of  lii.f  act,  and  lietnaiiderl  Ooin  llio  t'liilnt  Slnlrt 
his  release.  'J'he  .•Secretary  of  iStiite,  Mr.  WeljHtor,  adiniiled,  Ihiit  Hinoe  tli<>  aet  hnd 
been  done  under  orders,  it  was  no  louKfrnn  iiirlividual  olTenee,  liut  a  mailer  lielwren 
tbe  two  nation-",  and  recommeni'ed  bin  ri'li'iine,  liul  explaineil  Ihiil  llio  Federal 
rtovcrnmeni  liiid  no  |).iw<t  to  take  liini  from  tbe  euxtody  of  ijie  Hiate  ■  diei th.  Kur- 
land  relui-ed  —very  (irojierlN — to  enii-rlain  a»  an  exeuce  any  delrri  in  our  nyilem  ; 
saying;,  thiit  every  nnti'm,  prelenclinK  lo  hold  relnlionK  with  oilier  nali<>nx,  is  lioiind 
to  proviije  it>e!f  wilb  the  power  to  meet  all  just  demands  :  and  bad  not  lliu  New  York 
jury  disagrceil  at  tbe  trial,  we  sbould  liavu  bud  war  upon  that  i|ue.<tion. 


28  ENGLISH   NEUTRALITY. 

pensation  for  damages  inflicted  by  French  privateers  fitted  out 
in  our  ports.  The  philosophic  statement  of  the  principle  is 
given  by  Burlemaqui,  who  cites  Grotius  and  Heineccius,  and 
is  in  turn  cited  by  Phillimore  (vol.  ii.,  p.  230),  with  approval, 
in  these  words : 

"  In  civil  societies,  when  a  particular  member  has  done  an  injury  to 
a  stranger,  the  governor  of  the  commonwealth  is  sometimes  responsible 
for  it,  so  that  war  may  be  declared  against  him  on  that  account.  But  to 
ground  this  kind  of  imputation,  we  must  necessarily  suppose  one  of  these 
two  things,  sufferance  or  reception,  viz.:  either  that  the  sovereign  has 
permitted  this  harm  to  be  done  to  the  stranger,  or  that  he  afforded  a  re- 
treat to  the  criminal.  In  the  former  case,  it  must  be  laid  down  as  a 
maxim,  that  a  sovereign  who,  knowing  the  crimes  of  his  subjects — as,  for 
example,  that  they  practise  piracy  on  strangers — and,  being  able  and 
obliged  to  hinder  it,  does  not  hinder  it,  renders  himself  criminal,  because 

he  has  consented  to  the  bad  action Now  it  is  presumed  that 

a  sovereign  knows  what  his  subjects  openly  and  frequently  commit;  and 
as  to  his  power  of  preventing  the  evil,  this  is  always  presumed,  unle.'rs  the 
want  of  it  be  clearly  proved." 

This  principle  extends,  it  will  be  perceived,  so  far  as  to 
make  the  neutral  sovereign  prima  facie  responsible  for  the  un- 
neutral acts  of  the  belliorerents  when  done  or  initiated  within 
his  jurisdiction.  All  the  more  is  he  bound  to  prevent,  or  if  he 
does  not  prevent,  to  compensate  for  such  acts  done  by  his  own 
subjects;  and  the  question  remains,  although  no  longer  of  the 
first  importance.  What  is  the  national  character  of  the  Oreto 
and  Alabama  ?  .  Each  of  those  vessels  was  entirely  built, 
equipped,,  and  fitted,  in  British  waters  by  Englishmen.  They 
are  permitted  to  enter  and  lie  in  British  ports  as  safely  as  if 
they  were  commissioned  in  her  Majesty's  service,  at  the  same 
time  that  our  cruisers  are  warned  ofi",  and  forbidden,  even 
when  in  distress,  to  enter  for  coal — as  in  the  cases  of  the  Tus- 
carora.  Flambeau,  and  Saginaw.  The  Oreto  went  to  sea  with 
a  crew  consisting  of  fifty-two  Englishmen  and  one  American. 
She  sailed  under  English  papers  for  a  legitimate  port.  Both 
were,  at  or  about  their  departure,  ascertained  to  be  the  private 
property  of  Englishmen.  Unless  some  change  of  title  has 
taken  place,  these  vessels  are  yet  owned  in  England  by  Eng- 
lishmen. If  any  such  change  has  taken  place,  to  whom  has 
the  title  passed?  Not  to  the  Confederate  States,  or  any  re- 
bellious citizen  of  that  portion  of  this  nation;  for,  as  between 
England  and  the  rest  of  the  world,  these  rebels  are  to  be  con- 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  29 

sidered   belligerents,  and  no  contract  between  a  citizen   of  a 
neutral  state  and  a  belligerent,  to  aid  in  any  -vvay  the  prosecu- 
tion of  war,  is  lawful;  on  the  contrary^  every  such  agreement 
is,  ah  initio,  void,  and  these  vessels  still  remain  the  property 
of  the  British  citizens  who  built  them.      The  principle  of  law 
here  stated  has  been  decided  solemnly  in  both  England  and 
America.     The  English  case  is  Demetrius  de  Wiitz  v.  Hen- 
dricks (9  Moore,  C.  P.  Rep.,  686-7 ;  tried  in  1824).     The 
facts  of  that  case  involved  a  contract  to  raise  money  to   aid 
the   Greeks   in   their  revolt   against   the    Porte,   the    plaintiff 
claiming  to  act  for  the  exarch  of  Ravenna,  under  power   of 
attorney,  and   the  defendant  being  an  English  broker.     The 
contract  was  declared  by  Lord  Chief  Justice  Best  to  be  void  by 
the  law  of  nations.     The  principal  American  case  is  Kennett 
V.  Chambers  (14  How.  U.  S.  Rep.,  38,  44).     The  facts  were 
that  Chambers,  a  Texan  general,  had  agreed  to  convey  a  large 
tract  of  Texan  lands  in  consideration  of  advances  made,  and 
to  be  made,  at  Cincinnati,  for  the  purpose  of  aiding  the  Texans 
to  carry  on  the  revolution  against  Mexico,  with  which  power 
we  were  at  peace.     The  contract  was  made  at   Cincinnati,  in 
1836,  and  the  independence  of  Texas  was  not  recognized  by 
the  President  of  the  United  States  until  1837.     A  bill  having 
been  filed  to  obtain  a  specific  performance  of  the  contract  to 
convey,  the  Court  refused  to  enforce  it,  saying,  "  the  contract 
is  not  only  void,  but  the  parties  who  advanced  the  money  were 
liable  to  be  punished  in  a  criminal  prosecution  for  a  violation 
of  the  neutrality  laws  of  the  Uuited  States." 

Thus,  it  is  seen  that  the  Orcto  and  Alabama,  originally 
sailing  from  English  ports,  manned  by  English  law-breakers, 
are  still  the  property  of  English  owners;  because  all  attempts 
on  their  part,  if  any  such  have  been  made,  to  convey  their  in- 
terests to  our  rebellious  citizens,  or  any  one  of  them,  are  abso- 
lutely void  and  of  no  effect.  And  it  is  a  fair  (jucstion  for 
judicial  and  professional  consideration,  uhethcr,  in  adiUlion  to 
the  criminal  j)roceeditiys  given  by  the  Foreign  Knlintiiwut  Act, 
the  owners  of  the  Jacob  Bell  may  not  have  iln-ir  artimi  fur 
damages  against  Fawcett,  J'rcston  ^-  (a).,  of  Liverpool,  (he 
owners  of  the  Florida;  and  the  ownern  of  the  Jiril/iant,  and 
other  vessels  destroyed  by  the  Alabama,  their  res/fectirr  actions 
against  Messrs.  Laird,  <f  liirkenJieail,  the  rejmted  oivmrs  of 
that  vessel. 


30  ENGLISH    NEUTRALITY. 

One  more,  interesting,  but  still  less  important  question, 
practieallj,  relates  to  the  specific  character  of  these  vessels 
and  their  crews.  Are  they  pirates?  Piracy  is  defined  to  be 
the  ofience  of  depredating  upon  the  high  seas,  without  being 
authorized  by  any  sovereign  state.  (Wheat.  Int.  L.,  P.  2,  c.  2, 
§  15.)  These  English  sea-rovers  claim,  doubtless,  to  cruise 
under  some  kind  of  commission  from  the  self-styled  and  un- 
recognized "  Confederate  States."  I  do  not  propose  to  dis- 
cuss, with  much  seriousness,  here,  a.  question,  which  being  in 
this  place  of  little  import,  may  hereafter,  in  a  different  dis- 
cussion, become  of  the  first  magnitude;  still,  I  am  compelled 
to  say  that,  by  the  law  and  practice  of  nations,  it  appears  that 
no  commission  from  an  unknown,  unrecognized  authority  can 
relieve  the  persons  upon  those  vessels  from  the  character  of 
pirates,  liable  to  punishment  as  such  by  any  nation  who  may 
have  the  power  and  the  will  to  enforce  the  penalties  for  that 
crime.     Hautefeuille  says  (Des  Nations  Neutres,  tit.  3,  ch.  2): 

"  It  is  admitted  by  all  nations,  that  in  maritime  wars  every  individual 
who  commits  acts  of  hostility  without  having  received  a  regular  commission 
from  his  sovereign,  however  regularly  he  may  make  war,  is  regarded  and 
treated  as  guilty  of  piracy." 

From  what  sovereign  have  the  commanders  of  the  Florida 
and  Alabama  received  commissions  ?  Although,  in  view  of 
what  we  now  know  has  been  done,  it  may  be  rash,  I  yet  ven- 
ture to  assume  that  it  is  not  from  her  Majesty;  certainly  not 
from  the  executive  head  of  this  nation.  There  is  no  govern- 
ment, such  as  they  claim  to  represent,  in  existence — at  least, 
having  any  such  existence  as  would  afford  a  legal  protection  to 
them  in  case  some  nation  which  has  not  conceded  to  them 
belligerent  rights,  should  choose  to  seize  and  try  them  as 
pirates : 

"  Fur  it  is  a  firmly-established  rule  of  British,  American,  and,  indeed, 
all  jurisprudence,  that  it  belongs  exclusively  to  governments  to  recognize 
new  Stales;  and  that  until  such  recognition,  either  by  ike  government  of 
the  country  in  whose  tribunal  the  suit  is  brought,  or  by  the  government  to 
which  the  new  state  belongs,  courts  (>f  justice  are  bound  to  consider  the 
ancient  state  of  things  as  existing."  (2  Phillimore  25  ;  Rose  v.  Ilimnely 
4  Cranch,  272;  Hoyt  v.  Gelston  3  Wheat.  324.) 

Nor  would  it  avail  these  men  to  plead  that  they  are  not — 
according  to  the  general  description  of  pirates — enemies  to  all 
mankind;  for  in  the  case  of  the  Magellan  pirates,  in  1851  (see 
the  Jurist),  the  learned  Dr.  Lushington,  of  the  High  Court  of 


IS    THE    ALABAMA    A    BRITISH    PIRATE?  31 

Admiralty,  declared,  concerning  the  law  of  nations  relating  to 
pirates  : 

"If  it  vras  clearly  proved  that  the  accused  committed  robbery  and 
murder  on  the  high  seas,  they  were  adjudged  to  be  pirates,  and  suffered 
accordingly It  does  not  follow  that,  because  rebels  and  in- 
surgents may  commit  against  the  ruling  powers  of  their  own  country, 
acts  of  violence,  they  may  not  commit  piratical  acts  against  the  suhjeota 
of  other  states. 

The  same  question  arose  shortly  after  the  abdication  of 
James  II.,  in  a  manner  to  make  it,  in  all  essentials,  precisely 
parallel  to  the  one  on  hand. 

"  That  case  involved  a  discussion  of  the  general  principle,  whether, 
a  deposed  sovereign,  claiming  to  be  soveieign  de  jure,  might  lawfully 
commission  privateers  against  the  subjects  and  adherents  of  the  sover- 
eign de  facto  on  the  throne;  or  whetiior  they  were  to  be  regarded  aa 
pirates,  inasmuch  as  they  were  s-MVmg  animo  furandi  et  drprwdcndi  with- 
out any  national  character." 

And,  after  stating  at  length  the  argument  on  both  sides,  ^Ir. 
Phillimore  gives  as  his  judgment ; 

"  That,  after  allowing  every  deduction  in  their  fiivor,  the  reason  of  the 
thing  must  be  allowed  to  preponderate  greatly  towards  the  opinion  of 
Tindal,  that  these  privateersmen  were,  bv  the  law  of  nations,  pirates." 
(1  Philii.  398-406.) 

But,  whatever  may  be  the  correct  judgment  upon  this  point, 
one  thing  is  certain,  that  all  the  character  these  vessels  possess, 
is  Britisli ;  and  that  if  they  are  pirates  at  all,  they  are  Bhiti.'^h 
PIRATES,  roaming  the  seas,  with  the  implied  permission,  if  not 
actual  connivance,  of  that  government ;  and  tiiat  for  the  depre- 
dations of  these  vessels.  Great  Britain  is,  by  the  spirit  of  the 
law,  the  usage  of  nations,  and,  especially,  tlie  precedent  estab- 
lished in  her  favor  and  on  her  demand  in  171)4,  buuini  to  pay, 
even  to  the  last  dollar  of  loss. 

I  have  undertaken  this  hasty  investigafioji,  on  account  of 
the  importance  which  international  afiair.'i  are  assuinin;^  in  con- 
sequence of  the  outrages  of  these;  lawless  rovers,  an<l  because 
of  the  prevalent  ignorance — in  whicii  1  Inlly  shared — as  to  iho 
true  cliaracter  and  extent  of  <»ur  right  in  the  pretnises.  Fortu- 
nately, the  historical  facts  which  have  been  cited,  are  such  as 
carry  the  argument  upon  their  fiice  ;  and,  I'or  tlie  few  conclu- 
sions which  it  has  been  necessary  to  draw,  it  is  not  doubted  that 
they  will  be  found  by  those  who  may  give  this  grave  subject 
more  deliberate  considerai  ion — to  be,  in  all  essential  cli.n  ;icier- 
istics,  sustained  by  both  the  letter  and  spirit  of  the  law.  I"'(»r  I  ho 
purpose  of   a    brief  reca]iitulation,   tiicsc  conclusions  may  bo 


32  ENGLISH    NEUTRALITY. 

stated  as  follows :  First.    The  obligation  of  neutrality  •which 
Great  Britain  owes  this  nation  is  based  on  international  law, 
international  comity,  gratitude,  the  spirit  of  treaties,  and,  last 
and  least,  upon  that  compact  with  all  the  world,  called  the  Act 
of  59  Geo.  III.     Second.  That  international  law  is  the  science 
of  the  external  relations  of  nations,  and  that  its  sanctions  are 
neither  derived  from  nor  dependent  upon  things  municipal,  but 
bear  equally  upon  democracies,  aristocracies,  and  despotisms. 
Third.  For  this  reason,  no  government  can  excuse  itself  from 
full  performance  of  its  international  obligations  by  the  sugges- 
tion of  any  lack  of  internal  authority ;  and  within  the  scope  of 
this  proposition,  it  may  be  safely  asserted  that,  if  that  radical 
defect  in  the  internal  organization  of  this  republic,  which  pre- 
vented the  President  of  the  United  States  from  exercising  con- 
trol over  the  sheriflF  of  an  interior  county  of  New  York,  was 
not  a  good  excuse  in  McLeod's  case,  England  will  hardly  make 
a  defect  of  power  in  her  revenue  officers  suffice  in  the  matter  of 
the  Florida ;  nor  a  queen's  advocate's  "  malady"  in  that  of  the 
Alabama.     Fourth.   That  it  was  the  duty  of  the  British  gov- 
erment  in  both  cases,  after  the  application  of  Mr.  Adams,  to 
have  followed  the  "  Maury"  precedent  by  seizing  and  holding 
the  vessels,  and  thus  preventing  mischief,  until  a  full  investiga- 
tion could  have  been  had ;  and  having  failed-  in  this,  it  was  a 
duty  all  the  more  imperative,  when  the  real  purpose  of  these 
vessels  was  known,  to  follow  the  Portuguese-Terceira  precedent, 
by  sending  British  cruisers  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  to  prevent 
the  consummation  of  the  fraud,  as  well  as  bring  the  criminals 
to  justice  for  their  offence  against  the   dignity  and   peace  of 
England.     Fifth.  That  the  action  of  the  British  government, 
certainly,    and   its  motive,   apparently,   have  been  grossly  in 
breach  of  its  neutral  obligations.     Sixth.   That  it  is  a  maxim  in 
universal  justice,  as  well  as  in  the  common  law,  that  there  is  no 
wrong  without  a  remedy  ;  and  the  remedies  for  these  injuries 
are  of  two  kinds:  1st,  by  civil  action  and  criminal  prosecution 
against  the  English  owners,  their  servants,  agents,  and  abettors  ; 
and,  2d,  by  the  demand,  and  receipt  from  that  government,  of 
full  compensation  to  private  sufferers;  and  in  default  of  the  lat- 
ter, by  reprisals  and  war. 

And,  in  justification  of  such  a  war,  we  may  appeal  to  English 
state  papers,  where  the  reasons  will  be  found,  set  out  with  all 
requisite  particularity  by  England's  greatest  historian  for  ope 
of  her  greatest  kings. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


'^01%^ 


toOVg  IRECD 

LCi3i95i| 


!If-URC?Hom 

:.     OCT  1  5  ^^^^' 
EL 

OCT  1  5  19G8 


rm  L9-10m-3,'48  ( A7920 )  444 


'JAM  5    ^ 

DEC261969 


ii\j^    JAiW  5 


RECD  LD-URr 

JUN  2  8 19/7 


ITiK  LIBRARY 

UNIVERSn  Y  OF  CAL»ORNW 

IX)S  ANGEJUES 


AA    000  517; 


t 


PLEASf:  DO   NOT    REMOVf 
THIS    BOOK  CARDS 


.^NNtllBRARYa 


University  Research  Library 


_  J" 


